Search

In late March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia introduced mandatory 14-day supervised quarantine at hotels and other designated facilities for all international arrivals. From July 2020, most states and territories introduced a fixed charge for quarantine of up to $3220 per adult. The introduction of the fee was rationalised on the basis that Australians had been allowed sufficient time to return and there was a need to recover some of the cost associated with administering the program. Drawing on an empirical study of 58 returned Australian citizens and residents quarantined between March 2020 and January 2021, this paper aims to explore how people experienced paying for hotel quarantine, particularly with respect to fairness and relatedly, the principle of reciprocity. Reciprocity requires that the state has an obligation to assist individuals in discharging their duty to comply with public health measures and avoid disproportionate burdens accruing to populations or individuals. Though participants had varying opinions on whether they thought it fair to be charged for their quarantine, for many, the fee constituted a significant burden and source of stress. Given the undertaking of quarantine is primarily for the benefit of the public good, we argue the financial cost imposed on individuals does not meet the demands of reciprocity. It is imperative that future quarantine and isolation arrangements consider seriously the need to minimise burdens of individuals subject to such measures, and that fees do not become a new norm in public health and infectious disease control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: In vitro fertilisation (IVF) is now a common assisted reproductive technology (ART) procedure globally, with 8 million children alive today having been conceived utilising IVF. For many patients, IVF is a difficult experience with many discontinuing treatment because of emotional, relationship and financial stress, or intolerable physical side effects of hormone treatments. Design and Participants: A qualitative study, in which 31 professionals and 25 patients from the ART sector in Australia were interviewed. The interviews were analysed using codebook thematic analysis. Results: Our data indicates there are 'silences' within the therapeutic relationship of IVF, which may limit the capacity for patients to prepare emotionally, financially, or medically for the procedure, and may contribute to psychological distress and dissatisfaction with care. These 'silences' include what the patient 'is not told' by their clinician or 'does not hear' and what the patient feels they 'cannot say'. Discussion: Drawing upon the work of Jay Katz, Charis Thompson, and Miles Little on 'silences' and performance in clinical practice, we argue that although IVF is a complex and multifaceted procedure that is often conducted in a commercial setting, the clinical and therapeutic relationship between doctor and patient remains pivotal to the experiences of patients. The 'silences' within this relationship may impact negatively on decision‐making, and on the delivery and experience of care. Conclusions: Careful attention to the realities of IVF treatment in the clinic room (and awareness of the performances that hide them) should allow for more present and compassionate care. Such care may leave patients more satisfied with their experience and their choices, regardless of treatment outcomes. Patient or Public Contribution: This article draws on interviews with patients who had undergone or were currently undergoing IVF, as well as a range of representatives from the ART community (including reproductive medicine specialists, general practitioners, fertility nurses, counsellors, administrators in ART businesses and embryologists). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study is to identify and explore the unmet needs of adolescents and young adults living with endometriosis., Design: An open-ended online survey was conducted, with questions derived from prior research looking at areas of unmet need in healthcare, career and work, financial, information, psychological, social and cultural domains., Setting and Population: Self-selecting 18-25 year olds with surgically diagnosed endometriosis (self-reported) currently living in Australia were included as participants., Methods: Invitation to participate in an open-ended online survey was shared through the social media of Australian endometriosis organisations and the Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne. Surveys were analysed qualitatively through template analysis., Main Outcome Measures: Recording of the unmet supportive care needs of this population was carried out., Results: One hundred and thirty-one respondents fit the eligibility criteria of being aged 18-25 years (median age 23 years). Most were born in Australia (94%), university-educated (54%) and lived in a metropolitan setting (69%). There was a range of unmet needs that were presented across education, work, healthcare and relationships. Group-specific challenges were identified: doctors either over- or underemphasising future fertility; disrupted sexual and romantic life due to painful sex; managing pain in the classroom and workplace where periods are taboo; and being gender-queer in gynaecological medical spaces., Conclusions: The increasingly young age at which patients are receiving an endometriosis diagnosis precipitates a shift in patient care. The treatment decisions that are being made must be reflective of the unique needs of the adolescents who carry the burden of the disease. Clinicians are advised to be aware of and discuss needs with their patients., Patient or Public Contribution: The nine open-ended questions in this survey were developed from data from a preliminary series of interviews with endometriosis patients in a tertiary women's healthcare centre. In asking these data-informed questions to the online endometriosis community, patients across broader sociocultural demographics and disease states (including less symptomatic endometriosis) have provided a broader understanding of their supportive care needs., (© 2024 The Author(s). Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

In late March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia introduced mandatory 14-day supervised quarantine at hotels and other designated facilities for all international arrivals. From July 2020, most states and territories introduced a fixed charge for quarantine of up to $3220 per adult. The introduction of the fee was rationalised on the basis that Australians had been allowed sufficient time to return and there was a need to recover some of the cost associated with administering the program. Drawing on an empirical study of 58 returned Australian citizens and residents quarantined between March 2020 and January 2021, this paper aims to explore how people experienced paying for hotel quarantine, particularly with respect to fairness and relatedly, the principle of reciprocity. Reciprocity requires that the state has an obligation to assist individuals in discharging their duty to comply with public health measures and avoid disproportionate burdens accruing to populations or individuals. Though participants had varying opinions on whether they thought it fair to be charged for their quarantine, for many, the fee constituted a significant burden and source of stress. Given the undertaking of quarantine is primarily for the benefit of the public good, we argue the financial cost imposed on individuals does not meet the demands of reciprocity. It is imperative that future quarantine and isolation arrangements consider seriously the need to minimise burdens of individuals subject to such measures, and that fees do not become a new norm in public health and infectious disease control., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: One key challenge of the COVID-19 pandemic is health care access. Government-imposed restrictions and increased health care burden have induced considerable changes to health care services and their delivery. These are likely to have substantially impacted those with chronic conditions such as endometriosis, as they require sustained management., Aims: Our objective was to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the experience of people with endometriosis, and to use this information to inform health care delivery for the management of chronic conditions in a COVID-normal future., Materials and Methods: Invitation to participate in an open-ended online survey through social media of Australian endometriosis organizations and the Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne. Surveys were analyzed qualitatively through template analysis., Results: Of 576 surveys returned, 329 reported COVID-19 having an impact. Fifteen areas of impact were identified and grouped under three domains: impact on access to health care services, impact on daily life, and impact of isolation. Common impacts included reduced access to health care services, improved symptom management due to decreased day-to-day travel and work-from-home arrangements, and both positive and negative views of telehealth services., Conclusions: This study provides in-depth insight into the experiences of people with endometriosis during the COVID-19 pandemic, confirming previous studies' findings and offering insight into discrepancies between the Australian Healthcare system categorization of surgeries as "non-essential," and patient views of these procedures as "essential" to their well-being. Results may inform future adjustments to health care services and delivery to improve the lives of people with endometriosis, and by extension, other chronic conditions., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to report., (© Niamh Waters et al., 2022; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.)