Search

Background: Primary care services have not generally been effective in meeting mental health care needs. There is evidence that collaboration between primary care and specialist mental health services can improve clinical and organisational outcomes. It is not clear however what factors enable or hinder effective collaboration. The objective of this study was to examine the factors that enable effective collaboration between specialist mental health services and primary mental health care. Methods: A narrative and thematic review of English language papers published between 1998 and 2009. An expert reference group helped formulate strategies for policy makers. Studies of descriptive and qualitative design from Australia, New Zealand, UK, Europe, USA and Canada were included. Data were extracted on factors reported as enablers or barriers to development of service linkages. These were tabulated by theme at clinical and organisational levels and the inter-relationship between themes was explored. Results: A thematic analysis of 30 papers found the most frequently cited group of factors was "partnership formation", specifically role clarity between health care workers. Other factor groups supporting clinical partnership formation were staff support, clinician attributes, clinic physical features and evaluation and feedback. At the organisational level a supportive institutional environment of leadership and change management was important. The expert reference group then proposed strategies for collaboration that would be seen as important, acceptable and feasible. Because of the variability of study types we did not exclude on quality and findings are weighted by the number of studies. Variability in local service contexts limits the generalisation of findings. Conclusion: The findings provide a framework for health planners to develop effective service linkages in primary mental health care. Our expert reference group proposed five areas of strategy for policy makers that address organisational level support, joint clinical problem solving, local joint care guidelines, staff training and supervision and feedback. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It is known that experience of a previous crash is related to incidence of future crashes in a cohort of New Zealand cyclists. This paper investigated if the strength of such association differed by crash involvement propensity and by the need for medical care in the previous crash. Methods: The Taupo Bicycle Study involved 2590 adult cyclists recruited in 2006 and followed over a median period of 4.6 years through linkage to four national databases. The crash involvement propensity was estimated using propensity scores based on the participants' demographic, cycling and residential characteristics. Cox regression modelling for repeated events was performed with multivariate and propensity score adjustments. Analyses were then stratified by quintiles of the propensity score. Results: A total of 801 (31.0%) participants reported having experienced at least one bicycle crash in the twelve months prior to the baseline survey. They had a higher risk of experiencing crash events during follow-up (hazard ratio (HR): 1.43; 95% CI: 1.28, 1.60) but in the stratified analysis, this association was significant only in the highest two quintiles of the propensity score where the likelihood of having experienced a crash was more than 33%. The association was stronger for previous crashes that had received medical care (HR 1.63; 95% CI: 1.41, 1.88) compared to those that had not (HR 1.30; 95% CI: 1.14, 1.49). Conclusions: Previous crash experience increased the risk of future crash involvement in high-risk cyclists and the association was stronger for previous crashes attended medically. What distinguishes the high risk group warrants closer investigation, and the findings indicate also that health service providers could play an important role in prevention of bicycle crash injuries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tokelauans have more three-generation families living in one household than any other ethnic group living in New Zealand. They are also the most economically-deprived of all Pacific communities and consequently have little choice but to live in crowded conditions in old and relatively small dwellings at the low price end of the rental market. This paper reports on part of a cross-disciplinary study into health, and housing in which the focus is on the design, production and assessment of a purpose-built house for an extended family of Tokelauan origin. It provides an overview of findings from recent research on health and housing among Pacific peoples living in New Zealand, and identifies various architectural issues associated with health-related problems of cold, damp and crowding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In recent years, national and state/territory governments have undertaken an increasing number of initiatives to strengthen general practice and improve its links with the rest of the primary health care sector. This paper reviews how far these initiatives were contributing to a well functioning and comprehensive primary health care system during the period 2000-2002, using a normative model of primary health care and data from a descriptive study to evaluate progress. Results: There was a significant number of programs, at both state/territory and national level. Most focused on individual care, particularly for chronic disease, rather than population health approaches. There was little evidence of integration across programs: each tended to be based in and focus on a single jurisdiction, and build capacity chiefly within the services funded through that jurisdiction. As a result, the overall effect was patchy, with similar difficulties being noted across all jurisdictions and little gain in overall system capacity for effective primary health care. Conclusion: Efforts to develop more effective primary health care need a more balanced approach to reform, with a better balance across the different elements of primary health care and greater integration across programs and jurisdictions. One way ahead is to form a single funding agency, as in the UK and New Zealand, and so remove the need to work across jurisdictions and manage their competing interests. A second, perhaps less politically challenging starting point, is to create an agreed framework for primary health care within which a collective vision for primary health care can be developed, based on population health needs, and the responsibilities of different sectors services can be negotiated. Either of these approaches would be assisted by a more systematic and comprehensive program of research and evaluation for primary health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]