Search

Background: The health sector in Australia faces major challenges that include an ageing population, spiralling health care costs, continuing poor Aboriginal health, and emerging threats to public health. At the same time, the environment for policy-making is becoming increasingly complex. In this context, strong policy capacity -- broadly understood as the capacity of government to make "intelligent choices" between policy options -- is essential if governments and societies are to address the continuing and emerging problems effectively. Results: This paper explores the question: "What are the factors that contribute to policy capacity in the health sector?" In the absence of health sector-specific research on this topic, a review of Australian and international public sector policy capacity research was undertaken. Studies from the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia were analysed to identify common themes in the research findings. This paper discusses these policy capacity studies in relation to context, models and methods for policy capacity research, elements of policy capacity and recommendations for building capacity. Conclusion: Based on this analysis, the paper discusses the organisational and individual factors that are likely to contribute to health policy capacity, highlights the need for further research in the health sector and points to some of the conceptual and methodological issues that need to be taken into consideration in such research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Australia commenced a nationally coordinated transformation of its public and private mental health services in 1993. This paper presents an overview of the changes in mental health service delivery using data from the 2004 Australian National Mental Health Report. In the 10 years from 1993 to 2002, government spending on mental health increased 65 percent in real terms, with a 145 percent growth in expenditure for community-based services. Government subsidies to the private psychiatrist sector have declined. Consumer and carer participation in service planning and delivery increased, measures to improve quality introduced and patient level outcome measures are being adopted widely. However, some consumers with specific needs have been neglected and the transformation has not been implemented uniformly across the country. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Group model building is a process of engaging stakeholders in a participatory modeling process to elicit their perceptions of a problem and explore concepts regarding the origin, contributing factors, and potential solutions or interventions to a complex issue. Recently, it has emerged as a novel method for tackling complex, long-standing public health issues that traditional intervention models and frameworks cannot fully address. However, the extent to which group model building has resulted in the adoption of evidence-based practices, interventions, and policies for public health remains largely unstudied. The goal of this systematic review was to examine the public health and healthcare applications of GMB in the literature and outline how it has been used to foster implementation and dissemination of evidence-based interventions. Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and other databases through August 2022 for studies related to public health or health care where GMB was cited as a main methodology. We did not eliminate studies based on language, location, or date of publication. Three reviewers independently extracted data on GMB session characteristics, model attributes, and dissemination formats and content. Results: Seventy-two studies were included in the final review. Majority of GMB activities were in the fields of nutrition (n = 19, 26.4%), health care administration (n = 15, 20.8%), and environmental health (n = 12, 16.7%), and were conducted in the United States (n = 29, 40.3%) and Australia (n = 7, 9.7%). Twenty-three (31.9%) studies reported that GMB influenced implementation through policy change, intervention development, and community action plans; less than a third reported dissemination of the model outside journal publication. GMB was reported to have increased insight, facilitated consensus, and fostered communication among stakeholders. Conclusions: GMB is associated with tangible benefits to participants, including increased community engagement and development of systems solutions. Transdisciplinary stakeholder involvement and more rigorous evaluation and dissemination of GMB activities are recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The absence of universally available language services is a national healthcare system failure, the burden of which is suffered by patients with limited English proficiency and their healthcare providers. Conceptualizing mandatory provision of language access as an unfair, unfunded mandate ignores massive and fundamental social changes taking place. Overcoming language barriers is essential to safe, quality health care. This paper, informed by the experience of Hablamos Juntos, a national demonstration project funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, argues that national and health industry investments are needed to develop population-based approaches supported by communication and information technology, and that these investments may prove useful to improving healthcare communication for English-speaking patients as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article suggests that oral health may represent an important target for public health policy in Australia. Topics discussed include the overlap between oral health and indigenous health outcomes, the risk factors for poor oral health, and the role of education in improving health care in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

Background: Chronic diseases are a serious and urgent problem, requiring at-scale, multi-component, multi-stakeholder action and cooperation. Despite numerous national frameworks and agenda-setting documents to coordinate prevention efforts, Australia, like many countries internationally, is yet to substantively impact the burden from chronic disease. Improved evidence on effective strategies for the prevention of chronic disease is required. This research sought to articulate a priority set of important and feasible action domains to inform future discussion and debate regarding priority areas for chronic disease prevention policy and strategy.Methods: Using concept mapping, a mixed-methods approach to making use of the best available tacit knowledge of recognised, diverse and well-experienced actors, and national actions to improve the prevention of chronic disease in Australia were identified and then mapped. Participants (ranging from 58 to 78 in the various stages of the research) included a national sample of academics, policymakers and practitioners. Data collection involved the generation and sorting of statements by participants. A series of visual representations of the data were then developed.Results: A total of 95 statements were distilled into 12 clusters for action, namely Inter-Sectoral Partnerships; Systems Perspective/Action; Governance; Roles and Responsibilities; Evidence, Feedback and Learning; Funding and Incentive; Creating Demand; Primary Prevention; Social Determinants and Equity; Healthy Environments; Food and Nutrition; and Regulation and Policy. Specific areas for more immediate national action included refocusing the health system to prevention over cure, raising the profile of public health with health decision-makers, funding policy- and practice-relevant research, improving communication about prevention, learning from both global best-practice and domestic successes and failures, increasing the focus on primary prevention, and developing a long-term prevention strategy with an explicit funding commitment.Conclusions: Preventing chronic diseases and their risk factors will require at-scale, multi-component, multi-stakeholder action and cooperation. The concept mapping procedures used in this research have enabled the synthesis of views across different stakeholders, bringing both divergent and convergent perspectives to light, and collectively creating signals for where to prioritise national action. Previous national strategies for chronic disease prevention have not collated the tacit knowledge of diverse actors in the prevention of chronic disease in this structured way. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Growing imperatives for safety, quality and responsible resource allocation have prompted renewed efforts to identify and quantify harmful or wasteful (low-value) medical practices such as test ordering, procedures and prescribing. Quantifying these practices at a population level using routinely collected health data allows us to understand the scale of low-value medical practices, measure practice change following specific interventions and prioritise policy decisions. To date, almost all research examining health care through the low-value lens has focused on medical services (tests and procedures) rather than on prescribing. The protocol described herein outlines a program of research funded by Australia's National Health and Medical Research Council to select and quantify low-value prescribing practices within Australian routinely collected health data.Methods: We start by describing our process for identifying and cataloguing international low-value prescribing practices. We then outline our approach to translate these prescribing practices into indicators that can be applied to Australian routinely collected health data. Next, we detail methods of using Australian health data to quantify these prescribing practices (e.g. prevalence of low-value prescribing and related costs) and their downstream health consequences. We have approval from the necessary Australian state and commonwealth human research ethics and data access committees to undertake this work.Discussion: The lack of systematic and transparent approaches to quantification of low-value practices in routinely collected data has been noted in recent reviews. Here, we present a methodology applied in the Australian context with the aim of demonstrating principles that can be applied across jurisdictions in order to harmonise international efforts to measure low-value prescribing. The outcomes of this research will be submitted to international peer-reviewed journals. Results will also be presented at national and international pharmacoepidemiology and health policy forums such that other jurisdictions have guidance to adapt this methodology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While current debates on how to deliver sustainable health care recognise socio-economic dimensions to health service use, attention has focussed on how to reduce demand for services. However, the measures of demand may not account for a subgroup of the population who to date have remained out of sight because they do not access health services. This study aimed to describe the characteristics of individuals who self-reported having fair or poor health but did not use health services.Methods: Data from the 2010 LINKIN health census survey (n = 7895) and the 2013 HILDA National Panel Survey (n = 13,609) were analysed focussing on the population who self-reported their overall health status as fair or poor. Simple and multivariable logistic regression modelling examined characteristics associated with a lack of health services use. The outcome measure of interest was no health service use in the previous 12 months and co-variables included demographic and socioeconomic indicators, health-related quality of life, having no health condition and health risk factors.Results: Overall 21% of LINKIN respondents reported their overall health as fair or poor compared to 18% in the HILDA dataset. In LINKIN, 4.4% of those reporting fair or poor health, reported not using any health service provider in the past 12 months. Similarly, 4.5% of HILDA respondents were non-users. When adjusted for multiple co-variables, unemployment (aOR 3.24, 95% CI 1.28-8.17), educational level at Year 10 or below (aOR 1.94, 95% CI 1.02-3.70) and smoking (aOR 2.67, 95% CI 1.38-5.17) were significantly associated with non-use for the LINKIN data, as did lack of health conditions (aOR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08-0.41). The HILDA regression analyses indicated the same directions of association between equivalent variables and lack of health service use, with the exception of educational level.Conclusions: In line with recent assertions on real denominators in health need, this study describes those people rarely included in the population at risk and the potential for systematic bias towards the overestimation of the effectiveness of interventions. This study informs current policy debates and planning, including how we connect with hard-to-reach populations and how this sub-group might be more appropriately included when measuring effectiveness of health policies and programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most Western health systems remain single illness orientated despite the growing prevalence of multi-morbidity. Identifying how much time people with multiple chronic conditions spend managing their health will help policy makers and health service providers make decisions about areas of patient need for support. This article presents findings from an Australian study concerning the time spent on health related activity by older adults (aged 50 years and over), most of whom had multiple chronic conditions. A recall questionnaire was developed, piloted, and adjusted. Sampling was undertaken through three bodies; the Lung Foundation Australia (COPD sub-sample), National Diabetes Services Scheme (Diabetes sub-sample) and National Seniors Australia (Seniors sub-sample). Questionnaires were mailed out during 2011 to 10,600 older adults living in Australia. 2540 survey responses were received and analysed. Descriptive analyses were completed to obtain median values for the hours spent on each activity per month. The mean number of chronic conditions was 3.7 in the COPD sub-sample, 3.4 in the Diabetes sub-sample and 2.0 in the NSA sub-sample. The study identified a clear trend of increased time use associated with increased number of chronic conditions. Median monthly time use was 5–16 hours per month overall for our three sub-samples. For respondents in the top decile with five or more chronic conditions the median time use was equivalent to two to three hours per day, and if exercise is included in the calculations, respondents spent from between five and eight hours per day: an amount similar to full-time work. Multi-morbidity imposes considerable time burdens on patients. Ageing is associated with increasing rates of multi-morbidity. Many older adults are facing high demands on their time to manage their health in the face of decreasing energy and mobility. Their time use must be considered in health service delivery and health system reform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Out-of-pocket health expenditures in Australia are high in international comparisons and have been growing at a faster rate than most other health costs in recent years. This raises concerns about the extent to which out-of-pocket costs have constrained access to health services for low income households. Using data from the ABS Household Expenditure Survey 2003–2004, we model the relationships between health expenditure shares and equivalised total expenditure for categories of out-of-pocket health expenditures and analyse the extent of protection given by concession cards. To allow for flexibility in the relationship we adopt Yatchew's semi-parametric estimation technique. This is the first detailed distributional analysis of household health expenditures in Australia. We find mixed evidence for the protection health concession cards give against high out-of-pocket health expenditures. Despite higher levels of subsidy, households with concession cards do not have lower out-of-pocket expenditures than non-cardholder households except for the highest expenditure quintile. Cards provide most protection for GP out-of-pocket expenditures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay explores the changing nature of the concept of community wellbeing and the richness of the concept for enhancing measurement of societal progress beyond the use of indicators focused more narrowly on economic growth. Beginning with the history of the concept of wellbeing in several disciplines, the authors pursue an integrated and ecological understanding of community wellbeing and present examples of recent developments and applications of community wellbeing indicators in international settings and in Australia.Journal of Public Health Policy (2008) 29, 353–366. doi:10.1057/jphp.2008.16 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]