Search

Objectives: To examine: the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on access to health services by middle-aged and older Australians; and the use of telehealth services during the COVID-19 pandemic and its ongoing usefulness. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among participants who completed the COVID-19 supplement in the 45 and Up Study 2020 Survey. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association between socio-demographic characteristics and health conditions with missed/delayed access to health services, changes in health outcomes resulting from missed/delayed access, and use of telehealth services. Results: Data for 45 071 participants were analysed (56% female, 72% aged ≥65 years). Almost half (42.2%) reported they had missed/delayed access to health care due to COVID-19; mainly for dental services (26.1%), visits to a general practitioner (GP) (16.3%) and specialists (12.6%). Missed/delayed visits to GPs and specialists were more likely among females, participants from non-English-speaking backgrounds, with disability/illness, living in outer regional/remote areas or with chronic health conditions. People with a disability or high/very high psychological distress were twice as likely to report worse health as a result of missed/delayed care. Half (48.0%) the study participants used telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic and 81.9% indicated telehealth would be useful post-pandemic. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted access to healthcare services, particularly for people with a disability, and chronic or mental health issues who also reported worse health. This may account for their higher use of telehealth services as an alternate way of accessing health care. Ongoing evaluation of telehealth services for vulnerable groups post-pandemic is required. What is known about the topic ? The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on healthcare usage and access. What does this paper add? This paper identifies the impact of access to health care during the COVID-19 pandemic on vulnerable subgroups within middle-aged and older Australians, including those with chronic and mental health issues. Telehealth is an acceptable way to facilitate access to services for these groups. What are the implications for practitioners? Practitioners are strategically positioned to provide alternatives to face-to-face visits during times of limited access and identify those who are in most need of additional care by way of telehealth intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine implicit bias in employees at a cancer centre using an Australian race (Aboriginal–white) Implicit Association Test (IAT), in an attempt to understand a potential factor for inequitable outcomes of First Nations Australians cancer patients. Methods: All employees at an Australian cancer centre were invited to take part in a web-based, cross-sectional study using an Australian race IAT. The results were analysed using Welch t-tests, linear regression and ANOVA. Results: Overall, 538/2871 participants (19%) completed the IAT between January and June 2020. The mean IAT was 0.147 (s.d. 0.43, P < 0.001, 95% CI 0.11–0.18), and 60% had a preference for white over First Nations Australians. There was no significant mean difference in IAT scores between sub-groups of gender, age or clinical/non-clinical employees. 21% of employees (95% CI 17.65–24.53) had moderate to strong preference for white over First Nations Australians, compared to 7.1% with moderate to strong preference for First Nations over white Australians (95% CI 5.01–9.09). Conclusions: Inequitable cancer survival for First Nations patients has been well established and cancer is now the leading cause of mortality. This paper documents the presence of racial bias in employees at one cancer centre. We argue that this cannot be understood outside the history of colonialism and its effects on First Nations Australians, healthcare workers and our society. Further research is required to evaluate measures of racism, its effect on health care, and how to eliminate it. What is known about this topic? Australian cancer care providers deliver inequitable access and outcomes for First Nations Australians. Systemic and personal racism experienced by First Nations patients are thought to contribute to these inequities. What does this paper add? This paper documents the presence of cancer centre employee racial bias and reiterates the need for further research to document the effect of racism on cancer care outcomes for First Nations patients. What are the implications for practitioners? Healthcare practitioners, similar to other Australians, have implicit bias against First Nations Australians. Previous studies suggest that the presence of bias affects treatment options and outcomes for people of colour. In order to eliminate racism and associated inequities in cancer care services, multi-faceted anti-racism approaches are required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To compare outpatient attendance rates for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ('Aboriginal') and non-Aboriginal patients at a large metropolitan health service in Melbourne, Australia, and to describe the barriers and enablers experienced by urban-dwelling Aboriginal patients in attending hospital outpatient appointments. Methods: This study used a mixed-method approach. Proportions of referred patients who booked and attended outpatient appointments were extracted from a health service database. Aboriginal versus non-Aboriginal cohorts were compared using chi-squared tests. Eleven patients, one parent of a patient and two community nurses were interviewed by telephone to investigate perceived barriers and enablers to attending outpatient appointments among Aboriginal patients. Results: Outpatient referrals were greater among Aboriginal than non-Aboriginal people; however, referrals were significantly less likely to result in an outpatient clinic booking and attendance for Aboriginal compared to non-Aboriginal people. Interview participants reported several barriers to attending appointments, related to logistical, quality of care and cultural factors. Suggested facilitators to make appointment attendance easier included: provision of transport support, improving clinic scheduling, utilising a variety of appointment reminder formats, providing food in waiting rooms, flexible appointment timing options, outreach services, access to Aboriginal support workers, improving communication and relationships with Aboriginal people, cultural awareness training for staff and the provision of culturally appropriate spaces. Conclusion: Some barriers faced by Aboriginal patients in attending hospital outpatient appointments in urban areas can be addressed through implementation of enablers suggested by participants. Data have informed the development of a tailored, inclusive, culturally and consumer-focused appropriate hospital outpatient service model of care. What is known about the topic? Health outcomes are poorer and burden of disease greater among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people than non-Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. What does this paper add? Compared to non-Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in urban settings, more outpatient referrals are made, but these referrals are significantly less likely to result in an outpatient clinic booking and attendance. Barriers and enablers to urban-dwelling Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people attending outpatient hospital appointments relate to logistical, quality of care and cultural factors. What are the implications for practitioners? Identifying and understanding the barriers and enablers to healthcare access for urban-dwelling Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people provides a foundation on which practitioners and organisations can facilitate urban hospital outpatient service development, with the aim to better support healthcare engagement and appointment attendance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aims of this study were to explore and compare the perceptions of research capacity and culture (RCC) in metropolitan and non-metropolitan New South Wales (NSW) Local Health Districts (LHDs). Methods: The Research Capacity and Culture Tool was delivered online to clinicians and health managers. A 10-point Likert scale of success or skill at organisational, team and individual level of research capacity was used. An independent t -test assessed differences in domain means between non-metropolitan and metropolitan LHDs. Results: A total of 1243 participants responded. Responses to the survey indicated the perception of individual's research skills were greater than the perception of RCC at both the team and organisational levels. Participants from metropolitan locations had significantly higher mean scores across all three domains compared with non-metropolitan locations (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Results indicated the perception of individual's research skills were greater than the team and organisational levels. Participants from metropolitan locations had significantly higher perceptions of RCC across all three domains compared with non-metropolitan locations. This was the largest study to date in Australia investigating RCC in NSW LHDs, and the first study to explore multiple professions across multiple organisations while comparing metropolitan and non-metropolitan settings. This research may inform targeted strategies for building research capacity in NSW LHDs. What is known about the topic? Challenges exist in the current healthcare system to provide the infrastructure and resources to build capacity and embed a culture of research. What does this paper add? This study was significant in its reach across NSW and its perspective of capturing multiple professions. What are the implications for practitioners? Factors found to be consistent across the state may be suggestive of prioritisation for further investigation and implementation at the state and/or national level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The first objective of this study was to assess the associations between individual, community and hospital factors with emotional exhaustion (EE) among rural Australian doctors in training (DITs); the second objective was to apply criteria from an international standard that measures sustainable employability in organisations. Methods: A cross-sectional study of 70 DITs was conducted. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of EE across individual, community and organisational factors were calculated. Results: DITs with poor or moderate ability to cope with mental work demands had higher odds of being emotionally exhausted (OR 8.273; 95% CI 1.693–40.423), as did DITs with sleep disturbance (OR 6.187; 95% CI 1.721–22.242). Higher psychological distress (OR 1.701; 95% CI 1.286–2.249), more hours worked on-call (OR 1.052; 95% CI 1.011–1.094) and increased presenteeism (OR 1.285; 95% CI 1.049–1.576) were associated with being emotionally exhausted. Those who felt ambivalent or unsatisfied with hospital support networks had threefold higher odds of EE (OR 3.323; 95%CI 1.191–9.273). All metrics associated with the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) sustainable employability guidelines were significantly associated with EE; DITs who thought the hospital did not promote physical (OR 5.489; 95%CI 1.494–20.162) or mental health behaviours (OR 4.750; 95%CI 1.228–18.406) and those who did not perceive DITs overall well-being to be prioritised had higher odds of EE (OR 8.800; 95% CI 1.920–40.336). Conclusions: When DITs perceive the hospital promotes and prioritises well-being measures and provides a supportive environment, they are less likely to experience EE. This pilot study demonstrated the value of using an international standard to measure sustainable employability in hospitals. What is known about the topic?: Doctors are an at-risk population with increased rates of suicide, depression and anxiety compared with other professions. Junior doctors and regional DITs experience a greater burden of psychological distress, burnout and compassion fatigue than non-training, urban-based doctors. Regional and rural communities are often characterised by fewer doctors per head of population and workforce shortage, with an identified need to optimise the mental well-being of rural doctors to retain the medical workforce and ensure they continue to meet the needs of these rural communities. What does this paper add?: This paper adds to the evidence about the well-being of regional DITs. This pilot study is unique in its demonstration of the relationship between EE and sustainable employability factors within hospitals. The use of an international standard to measure elements of sustainable employability at the organisational level in relation to well-being can potentially be further tested and replicated across the whole organisation and in other healthcare organisations and professions. What are the implications for practitioners?: Rural hospital administrators and policy makers can potentially use the results to guide hospital interventions aimed at alleviating EE in DITs. It appears that supportive hospital environments are key factors to consider when developing these interventions. The international standard guidelines on sustainable employability can be used by top management and human resource managers to develop sustainable employability metrics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Access to medicinal cannabis is a timely and important issue in cancer care. Recent legislative changes in Australia have increased access to medicinal cannabis, but the views of people with cancer on this topic are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to explore the prevalence of the use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis among people with cancer. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed using an anonymous, 15-item study-specific paper-based survey. The survey was administered over a 2-week period in August 2017 in the waiting rooms of a specialist cancer hospital. Results: In all, 339 patients completed the survey (mean (± s.d.) age 59 ± 15 years; 52% male). Fourteen respondents (4%) were currently using cannabis medicinally. Only one of these respondents had a prescription for their cannabis product. Most respondents would consider using a medicinal cannabis product if recommended by their doctor (n = 271; 80%). Conclusion: This study is the first of its kind to survey the use of and attitudes towards medicinal cannabis in a broad sample of Australian people with cancer. Few respondents were currently using cannabis for medicinal purposes, but an overwhelming majority were in favour of increasing access and would consider using a prescribed product. What is known about the topic?: Cannabis may have a wide variety of medicinal uses, particularly in the cancer setting. Currently, people with cancer in Victoria have limited access to medicinal cannabis despite recent legislative changes. What does this paper add?: In a general sample of people with cancer, few were using cannabis for medicinal purposes, but most were in favour of widening access and would consider using a product their doctor prescribed. What are the implications for practitioners?: Despite supporting access, patients indicated that the recommendations of doctors and increasing the evidence base are necessary requirements to their use of medicinal cannabis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study investigated the delivery of guideline-recommended services for the management of acute rheumatic fever (ARF) and rheumatic heart disease (RHD) in Australian primary healthcare centres participating in the Audit and Best Practice for Chronic Disease (ABCD) National Research Partnership project. Methods: ARF and RHD clinical audit data were collected from 63 Aboriginal centres in four Australian jurisdictions using the ABCD ARF/RHD audit tool. Records of up to 30 patients treated for ARF and/or RHD were analysed per centre from the most recent audit conducted between 2009 and 2014. The main outcome measure was a quality of ARF and RHD care composite indicator consisting of nine best-practice service items. Results: Of 1081 patients, most were Indigenous (96%), female (61%), from the Northern Territory and Queensland (97%) and <25 years of age (49%). The composite indicator was highest in the 0–14 year age group (77% vs 65–67% in other age groups). Timely injections and provision of client education are important specific areas for improvement. Multiple regression showed age >15 years to be a significant negative factor for several care indicators, particularly for the delivery of long-acting antibiotic injections and specialist services in the 15–24 year age group. Conclusions: The results suggest that timely injection and patient education are priorities for managing ARF and RHD, particularly focusing on child-to-adult transition care. What is known about the topic?: The burden of rheumatic fever and RHD in some Aboriginal communities is among the highest documented globally. Guideline-adherent RHD prevention and management in primary health care (PHC) settings are critically important to reduce this burden. Continuous quality improvement (CQI) is a proven strategy to improve guideline adherence, using audit cycles and proactive engagement of PHC end users with their own data. Previously, such CQI strategies using a systems approach were shown to improve delivery of ARF and RHD care in six Aboriginal health services (three government and three community controlled). What does this paper add?: This paper focuses on the variation across age groups in the quality of ARF and/or RHD care according to nine quality of care indicators across 63 PHC centres serving the Aboriginal population in the Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia and Western Australia. These new findings provide insight into difference in quality of care by life stage, indicating particular areas for improvement of the management of ARF and RHD at the PHC level, and can act as a baseline for monitoring of care quality for ARF and RHD into the future. What are the implications for practitioners?: Management plans and innovative strategies or systems for improving adherence need to be developed as a matter of urgency. PHC professionals need to closely monitor adherence to secondary prophylaxis at both the clinic and individual level. RHD priority status needs to be assigned and recorded as a tool to guide management. Systems strengthening needs to particularly target child-to-adult transition care. Practitioners are urged to keep a quick link to the RHDAustralia website to access resources and guidelines pertaining to ARF and RHD (https://www.rhdaustralia.org.au/arf-rhd-guideline, accessed 3 October 2019). CQI strategies can assist PHC centres to improve the care they provide to patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The Child Dental Benefits Schedule (CDBS) is an Australian Government initiative providing basic dental care to children from low-income households. We sought to investigate levels of utilisation of the CDBS among Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal children to determine whether there is equal access to dental services provided through the schedule. Methods: CDBS data were obtained for four financial (July–June) years (from 2013–14 to 2016–17). The data captured all claims made during this period. The data included estimates of usage by Aboriginal status, age group and Dental Benefits groups (administrative categories of related dental procedures). Results: The utilisation of CDBS services was lower for Aboriginal children. However, in 2013–14, although the odds of using the schedule were higher for non-Aboriginal children (odds ratio (OR) 0.89; P < 0.0001) this was reversed in 2015–16 and 2016–17 (OR 1.11 and 1.21 respectively; P < 0.0001 in both years). The odds of Aboriginal children using preventive services was below that of non-Aboriginal children in 2013–14 (OR 0.82), 2014–15 (OR 0.76), 2015–16 (OR 0.83) and 2016–17 (OR 0.90; P < 0.0001) in all years. Conclusions: The data are encouraging with regard to equity because they show that for services overall, Australian Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal children have similar levels of utilisation. However, lower levels of the use of preventive services may indicate future inequalities in oral health among Aboriginal children. What is known about the topic?: The CDBS is an Australian Government initiative aimed at improving access to dental care for children from low-income households, including for Aboriginal people. By facilitating greater access to dental care, the schedule has the potential to help address inequalities in oral health for both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal children. What does this paper add?: There are no analyses available comparing the utilisation of the CDBS by Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal children. This study compared levels of utilisation of the schedule overall and specifically for preventive services. What are the implications for practitioners?: Greater efforts should be made to address inequalities in the utilisation of the CDBS between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal children. Although there are some hopeful signs, inequalities remain that may affect the oral health of Aboriginal children. There is also potential to encourage utilisation of the CDBS for greater provision of preventive services, including targeted population oral health initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aims of the present study were to describe the prevalence of vulnerability in a cohort of newborns, identify the factors that increase the risk of vulnerability and examine whether those who are most vulnerable are receiving home visits. Methods: A prospective cross-sectional study was performed using data collected from questionnaires completed by child and family health nurses and obstetric discharge summaries for each mother–baby dyad. Descriptive frequencies and percentages are used to describe the proportions of children who were vulnerable, offered services and had risk factors for vulnerability. Categorical data were compared using Pearson's Chi-squared analysis. Results: In all, 1517 newborns were included in the present study. Of these, 40.5% were identified as vulnerable and 13.9% had two or more risk factors for vulnerability (95% confidence interval (CI) 12–16%). The most common risk factors were biological. Across all newborns, 33.7% were visited at home, and 74.6% of vulnerable newborns were offered a home visit. Children identified as vulnerable were more likely to have a home visit than those who were not (z for 95% CI = 1.96; P < 0.1). Conclusions: Although the high reported prevalence of identified risk needs to be confirmed in further studies, identifying vulnerability allowed the offer of home visiting to be directed towards those most likely to benefit. What is known about the topic?: Of the Australian child population, 10–20% are vulnerable to adverse health, developmental and wellbeing outcomes. Vulnerable infants are at a greater risk of becoming vulnerable children, adolescents and adults over the life course. Biological and psychosocial risk factors for vulnerability are well described. Families with the greatest need are often the least likely to access or receive support, and have lower utilisation of preventative health services despite evidence that support in the first few years of life can significantly improve long-term outcomes. What does this paper add?: This paper provides a detailed description of vulnerabilities in a cohort of newborns and demonstrates that it is possible to assign risk of vulnerability within existing child and family health services using tools that identify biological and psychosocial risk factors. Identification of vulnerability risk allows prioritisation of services to those with the greatest need. What are the implications for practitioners?: It is possible to identify vulnerability risk within child and family health services. This allows those families at risk of future adverse health, developmental and wellbeing outcomes to be prioritised to receive health services and supports. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Expanding learner cohorts of medical students and general practitioner (GP) vocational trainees and the impending retirement of the 'baby boomer' GP cohort threaten the teaching and supervisory capacity of the Australian GP workforce. Engaging newly qualified GPs is essential to sustaining this workforce training capacity. The aim of the present study was to establish the prevalence and associations of in-practice clinical teaching and supervision in early career GPs. Methods: The present study was a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study of recent (within 5 years) alumni of three of Australia's 17 regional general practice training programs. The outcome factor was whether the alumnus taught or supervised medical students, GP registrars or other learners in their current practice. Logistic regression analysis was used to establish associations of teaching and supervision with independent variables comprising alumnus demographics, current practice characteristics and vocational training experiences. Results: In all, 230 alumni returned questionnaires (response rate 37.4%). Of currently practising alumni, 52.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 45.6–59.0%) reported current teaching or supervisory activities. Factors significantly (P < 0.05) associated with alumni currently undertaking in-practice clinical teaching and supervision were: Australian medical graduation (odds ratio (OR) for international graduates 0.36; 95% CI 0.14–0.92), working in a regional or remote area (OR 2.75; 95% CI 1.24–6.11) and currently undertaking nursing home visits, home visits or after-hours work (OR 2.01; CI 1.02–3.94). Conclusions: Rural–urban and country-of-graduation differences in the engagement of early career GPs in practice-based apprenticeship-like teaching or training should inform strategies to maintain workforce training capacity. What is known about the topic?: Projected changes in the demand for and supply of clinical teaching and supervision within Australian general practice will require greater uptake of teaching and supervision by recently qualified GPs to ensure sustainability of this teaching model. Although interest in and undertaking of teaching roles have been documented for GP or family medicine trainees, studies investigating the engagement in these clinical roles by GPs during their early post-training period are lacking. What does this paper add?: This paper is the first to document the prevalence of teaching and supervision undertaken by early career GPs as part of their regular clinical practice. We also demonstrate associations of practice rurality, country of medical graduation and undertaking non-practice-based clinical roles with GPs' engagement in teaching and supervisory roles. What are the implications for practitioners?: Establishing current teaching patterns of GPs enables appropriate targeting of new strategies to sustain an effective teaching and supervisory capacity within general practice. The findings of the present study suggest that exploring focused strategies to facilitate and support international medical graduates to engage in teaching during their vocational training, aided by focused supervisor support, may be of particular value. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The choice of whether to admit under a specialist or a generalist unit is often made with neither clear rationale nor understanding of its consequences. The present study compared the characteristics and outcomes of patients admitted with community-acquired pneumonia to either a general medicine or respiratory unit. Methods: This study was a retrospective cross-sectional study using data from public hospitals in Adelaide, South Australia. Over 5 years there were 9775 overnight, unplanned appropriate adult admissions. Patient length of hospital stay, in-patient mortality rate and 30-day unplanned readmission rate were calculated, with and without adjustment for patient age and comorbidity burden. Results: Over 80% of these patients were cared for by a general medicine unit rather than a specialist unit. Patients admitted to a general medicine unit were, on average, 4 years older than those admitted to a respiratory unit. Comorbidity burdens were similar between units at the same hospital. Length of in-patient stay was >1 day shorter for those admitted to a general medicine unit, without significant compromise in mortality or readmission rates. Between each hospital, general medicine units showed a range of mortality rates and length of hospital stay, for which there was no obvious explanation. Conclusions: Compared with speciality care, general medicine units can safely and efficiently care for patients presenting to hospital with community-acquired pneumonia. What is known about the topic?: Within the narrow range of any specific disease, generalist medical services are often cited as inferior in performance compared with a speciality service. This has implications for hospital resourcing, including both staffing and ward allocation. What does this paper add?: This paper demonstrates that most patients admitted with a principal diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia were admitted to a generalist unit and did not apparently fare worse than patients admitted to a specialist service; patients admitted to a generalist unit spent less time in hospital and there was no difference in mortality or readmission rate compared with patients admitted to a specialist service. What are the implications for practitioners?: The provision of generalist services at urban hospitals in Australia provides a safe alternative admission option for patients presenting with pneumonia, and possibly for other common acute medical conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine the extent of medical and non-medical out-of-pocket expenses (OOPE) among regional/rural and outer metropolitan Western Australian patients diagnosed with cancer, and the factors associated with higher costs. Methods: Cross-sectional data were collected from adult patients living in four regional/rural areas and two outer metropolitan regions in Western Australia who had been diagnosed with breast, prostate, colorectal or lung cancer. Consenting participants were mailed demographic and financial questionnaires, and requested to report all OOPE related to their cancer treatment. Results: The median total OOPE reported by 308 regional/rural participants and 119 outer metropolitan participants were A$1518 (interquartile range (IQR): A$581–A$3769) and A$2855 (IQR: A$958–A$7142) respectively. Participants most likely to experience higher total OOPE were younger than 65 years of age, male, resided in the outer metropolitan area, worked prior to diagnosis, had private health insurance, were in a relationship, and underwent surgery. Multivariate analysis of regional/rural participants revealed that receiving care at a rural cancer centre was associated with significantly lower non-medical OOPE (estimated mean A$805, 95% confidence interval (CI): A$735–A$875, P = 0.038; compared with other rural participants (A$1347, 95% CI: A$743–A$1951, P < 0.001)). Conclusion: The cancer patients who participated in this study experienced variation in OOPE, with outer metropolitan participants reporting higher OOPE compared with their regional/rural counterparts. There is a need for cost transparency and access to care close to home, so that patients can make informed choices about where to receive their care. What is known about the topic?: In recent years, OOPE for health care in general and cancer in particular have been widely debated by consumers and not-for-profit organisations; the topic has attracted much political attention because it affects both equity and access to care and has wider financial implications for the community. Research studies and reports from both consumer organisations and a Ministerial Advisory Committee found that cancer patients can face exorbitant out-of-pocket costs, and that individuals with private health insurance and those with prostate and breast cancer reported higher costs. In Western Australia, a cancer centre providing comprehensive cancer care was established in the second most populous region to ameliorate the high costs for travel and accommodation that regional cancer patients are known to experience. What does this paper add?: This study is unique because it collected detailed cost information from patients and reports on the OOPE of regional/rural and outer metropolitan Western Australian patients receiving care for one of the four most common cancers; it therefore offers novel insight into the experiences of these groups. This study demonstrates that outer metropolitan cancer patients are experiencing much higher OOPE compared with regional/rural cancer patients. Additionally, regional/rural study participants who accessed a Regional Cancer Centre experienced significantly lower non-medical OOPE, compared with regional/rural study participants receiving care elsewhere. What are the implications for practitioners?: First, there is a need for improved communication of OOPE to minimise costs to the patient, for example, by facilitating access to local cancer care. Health service providers and insurance companies can improve cost transparency for cancer patients by making this information more readily available, allowing patients to make informed financial choices about where to seek care. Second, the needs of working patients deserve specific attention. These patients face significant work uncertainty and additional distress following a cancer diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: A pilot study to: (1) describe the ability of emergency physicians to provide primary consults at an Australian, major metropolitan, adult emergency department (ED) during the COVID-19 pandemic when compared with historical performance; and (2) to identify the effect of system and process factors on productivity. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional description of shifts worked between 1 and 29 February 2020, while physicians were carrying out their usual supervision, flow and problem-solving duties, as well as undertaking additional COVID-19 preparation, was documented. Effect of supervisory load, years of Australian registration and departmental flow factors were evaluated. Descriptive statistical methods were used and regression analyses were performed. Results: A total of 188 shifts were analysed. Productivity was 4.07 patients per 9.5-h shift (95% CI 3.56–4.58) or 0.43 patients per h, representing a 48.5% reduction from previously published data (P < 0.0001). Working in a shift outside of the resuscitation area or working a day shift was associated with a reduction in individual patient load. There was a 2.2% (95% CI: 1.1–3.4, P < 0.001) decrease in productivity with each year after obtaining Australian medical registration. There was a 10.6% (95% CI: 5.4–15.6, P < 0.001) decrease in productivity for each junior physician supervised. Bed access had no statistically significant effect on productivity. Conclusions: Emergency physicians undertake multiple duties. Their ability to manage their own patients varies depending on multiple ED operational factors, particularly their supervisory load. COVID-19 preparations reduced their ability to see their own patients by half. What is known about the topic?: An understanding of emergency physician productivity is essential in planning clinical operations. Medical productivity, however, is challenging to define, and is controversial to measure. Although baseline data exist, few studies examine the effect of patient flow and supervision requirements on the emergency physician's ability to perform primary consults. No studies describe these metrics during COVID-19. What does this paper add?: This pilot study provides a novel cross-sectional description of the effect of COVID-19 preparations on the ability of emergency physicians to provide direct patient care. It also examines the effect of selected system and process factors in a physician's ability to complete primary consults. What are the implications for practitioners?: When managing an emergency medical workforce, the contribution of emergency physicians to the number of patients requiring consults should take into account the high volume of alternative duties required. Increasing alternative duties can decrease primary provider tasks that can be completed. COVID-19 pandemic preparation has significantly reduced the ability of emergency physicians to manage their own patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study sought to determine, among a large sample of Australian general practice patients: (1) the prevalence of smoking among different levels of alcohol misuse; and (2) whether the associations between demographic characteristics and alcohol use differ according to smoking status. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was administered from 2010 to 2011 to 3559 patients from 12 Australian urban general practices. Patients reported their demographic details, smoking status and their alcohol intake. Results: The overall prevalence of reported concurrent smoking and alcohol misuse was 7.8%. Smokers were 3.81-fold more likely to have a higher level of alcohol consumption than non-smokers (95% confidence interval 3.13–4.63; P < 0.0001). There was evidence that smoking was an effect modifier of the relationship between alcohol misuse and chronic illness. Conclusions: There was an increasing prevalence of smoking with increasing level of alcohol consumption. In addition, those with chronic conditions who smoked had greater odds of higher levels of alcohol consumption. Preventative interventions for these substances are needed to reduce the burden associated with concurrent smoking and alcohol misuse. What is known about the topic?: Tobacco and alcohol are the most commonly used substances and contribute to over 10 million deaths annually. The risk of disease is high when using either of these substances, however, concurrent use is associated with a greatly compounded risk. Australian data is limited regarding the prevalence of concurrent tobacco and alcohol misuse, however, international studies suggest variation in prevalence rates between different clinical settings. What does this paper add?: This study examined the prevalence of concurrent smoking and alcohol misuse among different levels of alcohol misuse severity within an Australian general practice setting. Additionally it explored whether the associations between demographic characteristics and alcohol use differ according to smoking status. What are the implications for practitioners?: This study has important implications for disease prevention and the delivery of preventive health services by general practitioners. Considering one in 100 clinical treatments provided in general practice relate to preventative smoking or alcohol counselling, it is critical that efforts are made to ascertain risk factors such as smoking and alcohol misuse to increase treatment rates. General practitioners should consider screening for smoking and alcohol misuse opportunistically during routine clinical encounters, as well as screening for smoking or alcohol misuse if one or the other is present. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of the present study was to compare the health status of South Australians with recent experience of caring for an adult with chronic disease with non-carers drawn from the same population. Methods: Data were collected via the South Australian Health Omnibus, an annual population-based, cross-sectional survey. Respondents were asked whether they had provided care or support in the last 5 years to someone with cancer, heart disease, respiratory disease, mental illness, neurological disease or dementia. Health status was measured using the Short Form-12 version 1 (SF-12) physical and mental component scale summary scores (PCS and MCS respectively), with poor health status defined as ≥0.5 standard deviation below the normative mean. Logistic regression explored characteristics associated with poor health status. Results: Of 3033 respondents analysed, 987 (32.5%) reported caring experience. Poor PCS and MCS were associated with carer status, lower-than-degree-level education, employment status other than employed and annual household income less than A$60 000. Being Australian born was a protective factor for PCS, whereas factors protective for MCS were being married or in a de facto relationship and age ≥65 years. Conclusions: Providing care or support in the last 5 years is independently associated with poorer health status, but not with the magnitude found in studies of current carers. Future research should explore health status recovery after completion of the caring role, and investigate whether relationships between health and socioeconomic status differ for carers versus non-carers. What is known about the topic?: Population-based survey studies in Australia and overseas have consistently found that informal carers have worse health status than non-carers. What does this paper add?: Including recent as well as current carers in a population-based sample was associated with less effect on health status compared with studies focused on current carers only. This finding is consistent with the possibility that health status recovers during the 5 years after caring. What are the implications for practitioners?: Support for Australian carers is warranted to ensure their continuing contributions to society and return to productivity after their caring role is completed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate how health consumer organisations manage their relationships with the pharmaceutical industry in Australia. Methods: We identified 230 health consumer organisations that received pharmaceutical industry support from 2013 to 2016 according to reports published by Medicines Australia, the industry trade association. A random sample of 133 organisations was selected and their websites assessed for financial transparency, policies governing corporate sponsorship and evidence of potential industry influence. Results: In all, 130 of the 133 organisations evaluated received industry funding. Of these 130, 68 (52.3%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 43.4–61.1%) disclosed this funding. Nearly all (67; 98.5%) reported the identity of their industry donors, followed by uses (52.9%), amount (13.2%) and proportion of income from industry (4.4%). Less than one-fifth (24/133; 18.0%; 95% CI 11.9–25.6%) had publicly available policies on corporate sponsorship. Six organisations (7.2%; 95% CI 2.7–15.1%) had board members that were currently or previously employed by pharmaceutical companies, and 49 (36.8%; 95% CI 28.6–45.6%) had company logos, web links or advertisements on their websites. Conclusion: Industry-funded health consumer organisations in Australia have low transparency when reporting industry funding and few have policies governing corporate sponsorship. Relationships between health consumer organisations and the industry require effective actions to minimise the risks of undue influence. What is known about this topic?: Pharmaceutical industry funding of health consumer organisations is common in the US and Europe, yet only a minority of such organisations publicly disclose this funding and have policies regulating their relationships with industry. What does this paper add?: Industry-funded health consumer organisations in Australia have inadequate financial transparency and rarely have policies addressing corporate funding. Organisations that have received more industry funding are more likely to report it publicly. What are the implications for practitioners?: Robust policies addressing corporate sponsorship and increased transparency are needed to maintain the independence of health consumer organisations. Governments may also consider regulating non-profit organisations to ensure public reporting of funding sources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of the present study was to determine Australian community views on factors that influence the distribution of health spending in relation to medicines. Methods: A cross-sectional web-based survey was performed of 3080 adults aged ≥18 years. Participants were asked to rank, in order of importance, 12 criteria according to which medicines funding decisions may be made. Results: Of all respondents, 1213 (39.4%) considered disease severity to be the most important prioritisation criterion for funding a new medicine. This was followed by medicines treating a disease affecting children (13.2%) and medicines for cancer patients (9.1%). Medicines targeting a disease for which there is no alternative treatment available received highest priority from 8.6% of respondents. The remaining eight prioritisation criteria were each assigned a top ranking from 6.6% to 1.7% of respondents. Medicines targeting a disease for which there is no alternative treatment available were ranked least important by 7.7% of respondents, compared with 2.4%, 1.9% and 1.0% for medicines treating severe diseases, diseases affecting children and cancer respectively. 'End-of-life treatments' and 'rare disease therapies' received the least number of highest priority rankings (2.0% and 1.7% respectively). Conclusions: These results provide useful information about public preferences for government spending on prescribed medicines. Understanding of public preferences on the funding of new medicines will help the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee and government determine circumstances where greater emphasis on equity is required and help inform medicines funding policy that best meets the needs of the Australian population. What is known about this topic?: There is increased recognition of the importance of taking into account public preferences in the heath technology assessment (HTA) decision-making process. What does this paper add?: The Australian public view the severity of disease to be the most important funding prioritisation criterion for medicines, followed by medicines used to treat children or to treat cancer. What are the implications for practitioners?: The general public are capable of giving opinions on distributional preferences. This information can help inform medicines funding policy and ensure that it is consistent with the values of the Australian population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Nursing and allied health professionals (AHPs) are in an ideal position to promote physical activity (PA) as part of their health care provision. The aim of this study was to investigate current promotion and knowledge of PA among people in these disciplines. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey of practicing Australian physiotherapists, nurses, exercise physiologists, occupational therapists, dietitians and pharmacists was conducted in 2016. Results: A total of 433 nurses and AHPs completed the survey. All disciplines agreed that providing PA advice was part of their role, although nurses were less likely to agree. All disciplines felt they had the skills to promote PA but nurses were more likely to report a lack of time as a barrier. Physiotherapists and exercise physiologists were more confident giving PA advice to patients. Most health professionals (68%) were aware of the PA guidelines, although only 16% were accurately able to describe all relevant components. In logistic regression modelling, women and those working in public hospitals were less likely to encourage PA. Awareness of the PA guidelines doubled the odds of encouraging PA in patients (odds ratio 2.01, 95% confidence interval 1.18–3.43). Conclusions: Australian nurses and AHPs perceive that PA promotion is part of their role, however few have specific knowledge of the PA guidelines. To increase PA promotion by nurses and AHPs awareness of the PA guidelines appears to be essential. What is known about the topic?: Nurses and AHPs are in an ideal position to promote PA, although there is limited evidence of their PA promotion and knowledge. What does the paper add?: Australian nurses and AHPs are confident and think it is feasible to promote PA to patients in several healthcare settings but many lack sufficient PA knowledge, limiting their PA promotion. What are the implications for practitioners?: Increasing PA knowledge of nurses and AHPs could generate increased levels of PA in the Australian population and improve national health and wellbeing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Limited international evidence suggests general practice registrars' emergency department (ED) referral rates exceed those of established general practitioners (GPs). The aim of the present study was to fill an evidence gap by establishing the prevalence, nature and associations of Australian GP registrar ED referrals. Methods: A cross-sectional analysis was performed of the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT) cohort study of GP registrars' consultation experiences, between 2010 and 2015. The outcome factor in logistic regression analysis was referral to an ED. Independent variables included patient-level, registrar-level, practice-level and consultation-level factors. Results: In all, 1161 GP registrars (response rate 95.5%) contributed data from 166 966 consultations, comprising 258 381 individual problems. Based on responses, 0.5% of problems resulted in ED referral, of which nearly 25% comprised chest pain, abdominal pain and fractures. Significant (P < 0.05) associations of ED referral included patient age <15 and >34 years, the patient being new to the registrar, one particular regional training provider (RTP), in-consultation information or assistance being sought and learning goals being generated. Outer regional-, remote- or very remote-based registrars made significantly fewer ED referrals than more urban registrars. Of the problems referred to the ED, 45.5% involved the seeking of in-consultation information or assistance, predominantly from supervisors. Conclusions: Registrars' ED referral rates are nearly twice those of established GPs. The findings of the present study suggest acute illnesses or injuries present registrars with clinical challenges and real learning opportunities, and highlight the importance of continuity of care, even for acute presentations. What is known about the topic?: A GP's decision concerning continued community- versus hospital-based management of acute presentations demands careful consideration of a suite of factors, including implications for patient care and resource expenditure. General practice vocational training is a critical period for the development of GP registrars' long-term patterns of practice. Although limited international evidence suggests GP registrars and early career GPs refer patients to the ED at a higher rate than their more experienced peers, these studies involved small subject numbers and did not investigate associations of registrars making an ED referral. Relevant Australian studies focusing on GP registrars' ED referral patterns are lacking. What does this paper add?: The present ongoing cohort study is the first to establish the patterns of ED referrals made by Australian GP registrars, encompassing five general practice RTPs across five states, with participating registrars practising in urban, rural, remote and very remote practices. Several significant associations were found with GP registrars making ED referrals, including patient age, continuity of care, the registrar's RTP, assistance sought by the registrar and rurality of the registrar's practice. What are the implications for practitioners?: The higher likelihood of GP registrars seeing acute presentations than their more established practice colleagues, coupled with a demonstrated association of registrars seeking in-consultation assistance for such presentations, highlights the importance of GP supervisor accessibility in facilitating ED referral appropriateness and in the development of registrars' safe clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aim of the present study was to determine the association between area-level socioeconomic disadvantage and glycaemic-related risk in health service users in the Illawarra–Shoalhaven region of New South Wales, Australia. Methods: HbA1c values recorded between 2010 and 2012 for non-pregnant individuals aged ≥18 years were extracted from the Southern.IML Research (SIMLR) database. Individuals were assigned quintiles of the Socioeconomic Indices for Australia (SEIFA) Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage (IRSD) according to their Statistical Area 1 of residence. Glycaemic risk categories were defined as HbA1c 5.0–5.99% (lowest risk), 6.0–7.49% (intermediate risk) and ≥7.5% (highest risk). Logistic regression models were fit with glycaemic risk category as the outcome variable and IRSD as the study variable, adjusting for age and sex. Results: Data from 29 064 individuals were analysed. Higher disadvantage was associated with belonging to a higher glycaemic risk category in the fully adjusted model (most disadvantaged vs least disadvantaged quintile; odds ratio 1.74, 95% confidence interval 1.58, 1.93; P < 0.001). Conclusion: In this geocoded clinical dataset, area-level socioeconomic disadvantage was a significant correlate of increased glycaemic-related risk. Geocoded clinical data can inform more targeted use of health service resources, with the potential for improved health care equity and cost-effectiveness. What is known about the topic?: The rapid increase in the prevalence of Type 2 diabetes (T2D), both globally and nationally within Australia, is a major concern for the community and public health agencies. Individual socioeconomic disadvantage is a known risk factor for abnormal glucose metabolism (AGM), including T2D. Although small-area-level socioeconomic disadvantage is a known correlate of AGM in Australia, less is known of the association of area-level disadvantage and glycaemic-related risk in individuals with AGM. What does this paper add?: This study demonstrates a robust association between small-area-level socioeconomic disadvantage and glycaemic-related risk in regional New South Wales. The study demonstrates that it is feasible to use geocoded, routinely collected clinical data to identify communities at increased health risk. What are the implications for practitioners?: The identification of at-risk populations is an essential step towards targeted public health policy and programs aimed at reducing the burden of AGM, its complications and the associated economic costs. Collaboration between primary care and public health in the collection and use of data described in the present study has the potential to enhance the effectiveness of both sectors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of the present study was to describe process changes in surgical team performance and team members' attitudes to safety culture following hospital relocation and expansion of perioperative services. Methods: The study was a naturalistic study using structured observations and surveys to assess non-technical skills (NTS; i.e. communication, teamwork, situational awareness, decision making and leadership) in surgery. This interrupted time series design used mixed-linear regression models to examine the effect of phase (before and after hospital relocation) on surgical teams' NTS and their processes that may affect performance. Differences in self-reported teamwork and safety climate attitudes were also examined. Results: In all, 186 procedures (100 before and 81 after hospital relocation) were observed across teams working in general, paediatric, orthopaedic and thoracic surgeries. Interobserver agreement ranged from 86% to 95%. An effect of phase was found, indicating that there were significant improvements after relocation in the use of NTS by the teams observed (P = 0.020; 95% confidence interval 1.9–4.7). Conclusions: The improvements seen in surgical teams' NTS performance and safety culture attitudes may be related to the move to a new state-of-the-art perioperative department. What is known about the topic?: Patient safety in surgery relies on optimal team performance, underpinned by effective NTS. What does this paper add?: The NTS of surgical teams may be improved through ergonomic innovations that promote teams' shared mental models. What are the implications for practitioners?: Effective multidisciplinary teamwork relies on a combination of NTS and ergonomic factors, which inherently contribute to team performance and safety climate attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. To investigate the range, frequency and management of ethical issues encountered by clinicians working in hospitals in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Methods. A cross-sectional survey was conducted of a convenience sample of 104 medical, nursing and allied health professionals in two NSW hospitals. Results. Some respondents did not provide data for some questions, therefore the denominator is less than 105 for some items. Sixty-two (62/104; 60%) respondents reported occasionally to often having ethical concerns. Forty-six (46/105; 44%) reported often to occasionally having legal concerns. The three most common responses to concerns were: talking to colleagues (96/105; 91%); raising the issue in a group forum (68/105; 65%); and consulting a relevant guideline (64/105; 61%). Most respondents were highly (65/99; 66%) or moderately (33/99; 33%) satisfied with the ethical environment of the hospital. Twenty-two (22/98; 22%) were highly satisfied with the ethical environment of their department and 74 (74/98; 76%) were moderately satisfied. Most (72/105; 69%) respondents indicated that additional support in dealing with ethical issues would be helpful. Conclusion. Clinicians reported frequently experiencing ethical and legal uncertainty and concern. They usually managed this by talking with colleagues. Although this approach was considered adequate, and the ethics of their hospital was reported to be satisfactory, most respondents indicated that additional assistance with ethical and legal concerns would be helpful. Clinical ethics support should be a priority of public hospitals in NSW and elsewhere in Australia. What is known about the topic? Clinicians working in hospitals in the US, Canada and UK have access to ethics expertise to help them manage ethical issues that arise in patient care. How Australian clinicians currently manage the ethical issues they face has not been investigated. What does this paper add? This paper describes the types of ethical issues faced by Australian clinicians, how they manage these issues and whether they think ethics support would be helpful. What are the implications for practitioners? Clinicians frequently encounter ethically and legally difficult decisions and want additional ethics support. Helping clinicians to provide ethically sound patient care should be a priority of public hospitals in NSW and elsewhere in Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. Targeting rural outreach services to areas of highest relative need is challenging because of the higher costs it imposes on health workers to travel longer distances. This paper studied whether subsidies have the potential to support the provision of specialist outreach services into more remote locations. Methods. National data about subsidies for medical specialist outreach providers as part of the Wave 7 Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life (MABEL) Survey in 2014. Results. Nearly half received subsidies: 19% (n = 110) from a formal policy, namely the Australian Government Rural Health Outreach Fund (RHOF), and 27% (n = 154) from other sources. Subsidised specialists travelled for longer and visited more remote locations relative to the non-subsidised group. In addition, compared with non-subsidised specialists, RHOF-subsidised specialists worked in priority areas and provided equally regular services they intended to continue, despite visiting more remote locations. Conclusion. This suggests the RHOF, although limited to one in five specialist outreach providers, is important to increase targeted and stable outreach services in areas of highest relative need. Other subsidies also play a role in facilitating remote service distribution, but may need to be more structured to promote regular, sustained outreach practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This paper describes the service distribution and models of rural outreach by specialist doctors living in metropolitan or rural locations. Methods: The present study was a national cross-sectional study of 902 specialist doctors providing 1401 rural outreach services in the Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life study, 2008. Five mutually exclusive models of rural outreach were studied. Results: Nearly half of the outreach services (585/1401; 42%) were provided to outer regional or remote locations, most (58%) by metropolitan specialists. The most common model of outreach was drive-in, drive-out (379/902; 42%). In comparison, metropolitan-based specialists were less likely to provide hub-and-spoke models of service (odd ratio (OR) 0.31; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21-0.46) and more likely to provide fly-in, fly-out models of service (OR 4.15; 95% CI 2.32-7.42). The distance travelled by metropolitan specialists was not affected by working in the public or private sector. However, rural-based specialists were more likely to provide services to nearby towns if they worked privately. Conclusions: Service distribution and models of outreach vary according to where specialists live as well as the practice sector of rural specialists. Multilevel policy and planning is needed to manage the risks and benefits of different service patterns by metropolitan and rural specialists so as to promote integrated and accessible services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. This study explored associations between demographic, socioeconomic, behavioural risk, and health factors (study factors) and detection of type 2 diabetes. Methods. A secondary analysis of data extracted from the AusDiab study was undertaken. Participants were classified as known diabetes (KDM), newly detected diabetes (NDDM), impaired fasting glucose (IFG), impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), or normal according to results of a glucose tolerance test. Results. The weighted prevalence of diabetes was 6.9%; 49.6% of participants with diabetes (NDDM+KDM) were classified as NDDM. Although study factors were associated with diabetes prevalence, most were not associated with proportion of diabetic participants classified as NDDM. Among participants with diabetes, NDDM was more likely among those who spoke English at home, were in good general health and did not report past history of cardiovascular disease. Conclusions. Although a range of personal and socioeconomic factors are associated with diabetes prevalence, these factors are not similarly associated with prior detection of diabetes. These findings highlight the importance of systematic approaches to screening for diabetes risk focussed on the whole population, with selective screening based on multi-factorial assessment of diabetes risk using the AUSDRISK Assessment Tool. What is known about the topic? Type 2 diabetes is an increasing public health problem and early detection is associated with improved outcomes. About half of the participants with diabetes in the AusDiab study had been diagnosed previously with diabetes, with the remainder being newly diagnosed in the study. What does this paper add? A range of demographic, socioeconomic, behavioural risk and health factors were associated with increased risk of diabetes. However, these factors did not differentiate between those with a prior diagnosis of diabetes and those with newly diagnosed diabetes. Among participants with diabetes, NDDM was more likely among those who spoke English at home, were in good general health or reported no past history of cardiovascular disease. What are the implications for practitioners? Screening for type 2 diabetes should be broadly focussed on the whole population, with selective blood testing based on multi-factorial assessment of diabetes risk using the AUSDRISK Assessment Tool. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]