Search

Objective: To determine the prevalence and clinical management characteristics of chiropractors practising in urban and rural or remote Australia. Design: A cross‐sectional analysis of the Australian Chiropractic Research Network project data. Setting: Nationally representative sample of registered chiropractors practising in Australia. Participants: Chiropractors who participated in the Australian Chiropractic Research Network project and answered a question about practising in urban or rural or remote areas in the practitioner questionnaire. Main outcome measure: The demographics, practice characteristics and clinical management of chiropractors. Results: The majority of chiropractors indicated that they practise in urban areas only, while 22.8% (n = 435) practice in rural or remote areas only and 4.0% (n = 77) practice in both urban and rural or remote areas. Statistically significant predictors of chiropractors who practice in rural or remote areas, as compared to urban areas, included more patient visits per week, practising in more than one location, no imaging facilities on site, often treating degenerative spinal conditions or migraine, often treating people aged over 65 years, frequently treating Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and frequently using biomechanical pelvic blocking or the sacro‐occipital technique. Conclusion: A substantial number of chiropractors practice in rural or remote Australia and these rural or remote‐based chiropractors are more likely to treat a wide range of musculoskeletal cases and include an Indigenously diverse group of patients than their urban‐located colleagues. Unique practice challenges for rural or remote chiropractors include a higher workload and a lack of diagnostic tools. Chiropractors should be acknowledged and considered within rural or remote health care policy and service provision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective This paper aims to describe cancer survival and examine association between survival and socio-demographic characteristics across Barwon South- Western region ( BSWR) in Victoria, Australia. Design This study is based on the retrospective cohort database of patients accessing oncology services across BSWR. Setting Six rural and three urban hospital settings across the BSWR. Participants The participants were patients who were diagnosed with cancer in 2009. Main outcome measures Overall survival (OS) of participants was the main outcome measure. Results Total of 1778 eligible patients had four-year OS for all cancers combined of 59.7% (95% CI, 57.4-62.0). Improved OS was observed for patients in the upper socio-economic tertile (64.2%; 95% CI, 60.9-67.5) compared to the middle (59.3%; 95% CI, 55.5-63.1) and lowest tertiles (49.6%; 95% CI, 44.2-54.9) ( P < 0.01). On multivariate analyses, higher socio-economic status remained a significant predictor of OS adjusting for gender, remoteness and age ( HR [hazard ratio] 0.81; 95% CI 0.74-0.89; P < 0.01). Remoteness was significantly associated with improved OS after adjusting for age, gender and socio-economic status ( HR 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.97; P = 0.01). Older age ≥70 years compared to <70 years conferred inferior OS ( HR 3.08; 95% CI, 2.64-3.59; P < 0.01). Conclusions Our study confirmed improved survival outcomes for patients of higher socio-economic status and younger age. Future research to explain the unexpected survival benefit in patients who lived in more remote areas should examine factors including the correlation between geographical residence and eventual treatment facility as well as compare the BSWR care model to other regions' approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]