Search

Background: Increasing numbers of primary care practitioners in refugee resettlement countries are providing care to refugees. Access to trained interpreters is a priority for these practitioners, but there are many barriers to the implementation of interpreted consultations in routine care. There is a lack of international, theoretically informed research. The purpose of this paper is to understand barriers to interpreter use in primary care consultations in four resettlement countries using Normalisation Process Theory. Method: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey with networks of primary care practitioners (PCPs) who care for refugees in Australia, Canada, Ireland and the US (n = 314). We analysed qualitative data from the survey about barriers to interpreter use (n = 178). We completed an inductive thematic analysis, iteratively developed a Normalisation Process Theory (NPT)-informed coding frame and then mapped the emergent findings onto the theory's construct about enacting interpreted consultations. Results: In all four countries, the use of an interpreter presented communication and interaction challenges between providers and patients, which can impede the goals of primary care consultations. Primary care practitioners did not always have confidence in interpreted consultations and described poor professional practice by some interpreters. There was variation across countries, and inconsistency within countries, in the availability of trained interpreters and funding sources. Conclusion: There are shared and differential barriers to implementation of interpreted consultations in a consistent and sustained way in the four countries studied. These findings can be used to inform country-specific and international level policies and interventions focusing on improving skills and resources for interpreted consultations to improve implementation of interpreted primary care consultations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People living in rural and remote communities commonly experience significant health disadvantages. Geographical barriers and reduced specialist and generalist services impact access to care when compared with metropolitan context. Innovative models of care have been developed for people living with chronic diseases in rural areas with the goal of overcoming these inequities. The aim of this paper was to describe the characteristics and outcomes of studies investigating innovative models of care for people living with chronic disease in rural areas of developed countries where a metropolitan comparator was included.Methods: An integrative systematic review was undertaken. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) method was used to understand the empirical and theoretical data on clinical outcomes for people living with chronic disease in rural compared with metropolitan contexts and their models of care in Australia, New Zealand, United States, Canada and the United Kingdom.Results: Literature searching revealed 620 articles published in English between 1st January 2000 and 31st March 2019. One hundred sixty were included in the review including 68 from the United States, 59 from Australia and New Zealand (5), 21 from Canada and 11 from the United Kingdom and Ireland. 53% (84) focused on cardiovascular disease; 27% (43) diabetes mellitus; 8% (12) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; and 13% (27) chronic kidney disease. Mortality was only reported in 10% (16) of studies and only 18% (29) reported data on Indigenous populations.Conclusions: This integrated review reveals that the published literature on common chronic health issues pertaining to rural and remote populations is largely descriptive. Only a small number of publications focus on mortality and comparative health outcomes from health care models in both urban and non-urban populations. Innovative service models and telehealth are together well represented in the published literature but data on health outcomes is relatively sparse. There is significant scope for further directly comparative studies detailing the effect of service delivery models on the health outcomes of urban and rural populations. We believe that such data would further knowledge in this field and help to break the deadly synergy between increased rurality and poorer outcomes for people with chronic disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. To date, there has been no attempt to describe or compare physical therapy as practiced globally, nor any evidence that an international data set exists to support this effort. It is known that research evidence can be used in strategic and tactical ways, especially within the highly politicized context of the policy arena. The International Private Practitioners Association recognized the potential value a global evidence base could have in influencing policy and supporting professional development in a number of countries, yet it lacked a mechanism to achieve these aims. Objectives. The purposes of this study were: (1) to identify and test an international data set, definitions, and means of data collection and (2) to establish views in relation to the value of international collaborations. Design. A mixed, prospective design was used in the study. Method. Phase 1 (2006-2007) involved the development of a data set, definitions, and Web-based and paper-based data collection options involving 98 physical therapists from 68 physical therapy practices in 7 countries. Phase 2 (2008-2009) involved testing of the data set in 34 practices involving 3,195 patient episodes and included physical therapist feedback of experience, local relevance of the data set, and value of international collaborations. Results. Testing confirmed the relevance and reliability of the data set and definitions and a preference for Web-based data collection (74.0%). Physical therapist feedback supported these findings. Most respondents (60.0%-100.0%) reported the value of further international collaborations for their profession nationally or internationally. Limitations. Although a true international collaboration, the limited sample size should be recognized. Conclusions. It is possible to develop an agreed-upon international data set and means of data collection. Testing appears to support its acceptability and relevance for use in practice. Participants highly valued the opportunity to undertake international collaborations that may benefit their profession nationally and internationally. Further testing and use of the data set are advocated before final validation is sought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]