Search

Background: Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) was launched in 2013 to provide financial support packages for people with disability to purchase supports and services to enhance independence. People with disability are required to develop a plan with the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA), the government department responsible for managing the NDIS. This scoping review aims to ascertain the level of research into people's experience of the NDIS planning process in these geographic areas. Methodology: Research publication databases were searched using a specific search string to identify research about people with disability and their families/carer's experiences of the NDIS planning process in regional, rural and remote regions of Australia. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was adopted to appraise the quality of the research publications. Research publications focused on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were additionally appraised using the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Quality Appraisal Tool developed by the Centre for Excellence in Aboriginal Chronic Disease Knowledge Translation and Exchange. A thematic synthesis of the publications' contents was undertaken to ascertain people with disabilities and carers experience of the NDIS planning process. Results: Ten (N = 10) research papers were found that met the inclusion criteria. Two papers were policy reviews and reported on the improvements of the NDIS planning process since its conception. The analysis found the research archive focused on five themes: (1) healthcare workforce and NDIA staff; (2) NDIS package holders and carers lack of awareness of the NDIS; (3) cultural/socio‐economic barriers; (4) travel funding; and (5) emotional burden of the NDIS planning process. Conclusion: There are limited papers available that explore people's experiences of the NDIS planning process in regional, rural and remote regions of Australia. This systematic review illuminates the difficulties, barriers and concerns of people with disability and their carers about the planning process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rural medical education is known as one of the most effective strategies in improving rural recruitment and retention. The aim was to identify modes of delivery to improve access to rural postgraduate medical education. Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework was used for conducting scoping reviews. CINAHL, Google Scholar, ERIC, PsycINFO, Medline and PubMed were searched to identify peer‐reviewed English‐language literature published between 2000 and 2019 focusing on postgraduate rural and regional medical education. A total of 102 articles were identified, with 51 included in the final analysis after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. Outcome measures included: article type; research methodology; date of publication; country of origin; and study population. Through iterative reading, common themes were identified. A typology of 6 content themes emerged as follows: rural curriculum; procedural skills; rurally based learning; service delivery; workforce; and distance learning. The majority of articles focused on rural curriculum, and rurally based learning, with half originating from Australia or New Zealand. Although results strongly emphasised context and curriculum in rural environments, lack of specific and pragmatic approaches was noted. Surprisingly, few articles focused on rural distance learning utilising information and communication technology. Pathways to improve rural education access include recognition of the unique rural context in curriculums; development of rural educational faculty; and creation of opportunities for rural specialist training. Emphasis should be given for education provided through rural centres rather than urban facilities. Use of information technology could be increased, for example in remote trainee supervision programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Poor health outcomes amongst marginalized groups result in part from health inequities related to social and structural determinants of health. Marginalized people report higher incidences of comorbidities, chronic disease and adverse health behaviours than their nondisadvantaged peers. The objective of this review is to examine marginalized Australians' experiences of and access to community‐based primary health services in urban locations. Methods: A systematic search incorporating related MeSH terms and synonyms pertaining to marginalized Australian populations and their health‐seeking was conducted across seven databases. We included qualitative studies that reported experiences of health‐seeking within community‐based primary health care in metropolitan Australia. Participant populations experiencing marginalization due to social stigma and isolation, early‐life disadvantage, poor health and/or financial hardship were included. A meta‐ethnographic framework was used to synthesize themes across selected studies and researcher triangulation was employed to develop higher‐order themes. Results: Search results revealed 26 studies included for critical appraisal and synthesis. Seven higher‐order themes were developed describing experiences of health service engagement amongst marginalized groups: (1) Understanding the patient within the context of family and community, (2) Health and cultural beliefs influence health‐seeking, (3) Lack of information and poor cultural competence limit utilization of services, (4) Motivation for treatment influences health service engagement, (5) Accessing services, a spectrum of experience—from discrimination to validation, (6) Navigating a complex system in a complex society, (7) Preferences for health care and expectations for systemic change. Conclusion: Marginalized Australians experience health disadvantage across micro, meso and macro levels of health system navigation and commonalities in health‐seeking were identified across each of the distinct marginalized groups in our analysis. This review outlines important areas of consideration for health care provision and policy development essential to helping address health inequities for a diversity of marginalized populations. Patient or Public Contribution: Whilst patient voices were reported across all studies included within this review, no further patient or public contribution applies to this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]