Search

Background: Electronic prescription (e-prescription) was introduced in 2020 in Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic. This research aimed to explore general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists' experience with, and facilitators and barriers to, the use of e-prescription. Methods: This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews with GPs and pharmacists in Greater Sydney to explore their experience with e-prescription. Thematic analysis used descriptive and mixed inductive and deductive approaches. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) was used to further interpret and organise the themes. Results: Eleven GPs and nine pharmacists were interviewed. Thirteen themes were elicited, seven of which were categorised as benefits (facilitators) and six were challenges (barriers). Four facilitator themes (convenience for healthcare providers (HCPs) and patients, addressing issues with paper prescriptions, contactless nature reducing access barriers during COVID-19 lockdown, and enabling patients to manage multiple prescriptions) were mapped to the TAM construct of 'perceived usefulness'; and one facilitator (an easier process) and two barrier themes (lack of information during implementation, and technological issues) were mapped to the TAM construct of 'perceived ease of use'. Themes that fell outside these constructs were separately categorised: four barrier themes (reluctance of some patients and HCPs to change, patient expectations of 'instant prescription' and lost opportunities for best-practice care, HCPs' perceptions of inadequate governmental governance, and ongoing costs) were 'other issues with e-prescription', and two facilitator themes (providing training on the use of e-prescription for HCPs and patients, and making e-prescription more streamlined) were 'suggestions to improve'. Conclusion: There are many facilitators and barriers to the use of e-prescription. Our findings may inform the future promotion of e-prescription post-COVID-19 pandemic. Further research should focus on consumers' perspectives of e-prescription. It is inevitable that electronic prescriptions will one day supersede paper prescriptions, but there is resistance to their implementation at the practitioner and patient levels. This paper explored GPs and pharmacists' experience and views, and found that while e-prescription improves the quality of patient care, there are several challenges to its effective use. Findings may inform the future promotion of e-prescription, particularly post-COVID-19 pandemic, and guide future research in exploring consumer perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: It is widely understood that a key means of improving health systems and patient outcomes is through research – accessing, understanding, generating and applying research evidence-based practice. To promote more targeted and strategic research in Allied Health practice, this study sought to establish the principles, areas and priorities for clinical research as perceived by Allied Health leaders in the South Australian public health system. Methods: The study used a mixed-methods design (full, sequential and equal model). Participants were recruited from the South Australian Department of Health and Wellbeing employment lists for Allied Health senior leaders. Consenting participants attended face-to-face focus groups; after an overview presentation, they discussed the principles for Allied Health research, followed by areas and priorities for research. Summaries of the responses were themed descriptively and circulated electronically so participants could confirm the research areas and ascribe priority ratings, clinical populations and services. Results: A total of 28 people attended the stakeholder forum (5 online); 20 responded to the second-round electronic summary. Nine principles of research action were agreed. Fourteen research areas were identified and prioritised. There was a relatively consistent prioritisation of measuring Allied Health value, Allied Health workforce, hospital avoidance and closing the gap for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples health outcomes – whether the individuals were thinking about their own service or the state as a whole. Conclusions: Allied Health leadership identified key principles and priorities for research to improve service delivery and patient outcomes. These priorities should generate further discussion and interest for novice and experienced researchers and leaders and can be used to inform granting and project plans. What is known about the topic? Allied Health are well equipped to engage in research but have limited capacity. What does this paper add? We have identified key priorities and principles to inform Allied Health research activity. What are the implications for practitioners? Practitioners, funders and other stakeholders can develop these identified principles and priorities to direct research time and resources for the most impact on health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To explore clinicians' use and perceptions of interdisciplinary communication pathways for escalating care within the pre-medical emergency team (pre-MET) tier of rapid response systems. Method: A sequential mixed-methods study was conducted using observations and interviews. Participants were clinicians (nurses, allied health, doctors) caring for orthopaedic and general medicine patients at one hospital. Descriptive and thematic analyses were conducted. Results: Escalation practices were observed for 13 of 27 pre-MET events. Leading communication methods for escalating pre-MET events were alphanumeric pagers (61.5%) and in-person discussions (30.8%). Seven escalated pre-MET events led to bedside pre-MET reviews by doctors. Clinician interviews (n = 29) culminated in two themes: challenges in escalation of care, and navigating information gaps. Clinicians reported deficiencies in communication methods for escalating care that hindered interdisciplinary communication and clinical decision-making pertaining to pre-MET deterioration. Conclusion: Policy-defined escalation pathways were inconsistently utilised for pre-MET deterioration. Available communication methods for escalating pre-MET events inadequately fulfilled clinicians' needs. Variable perceptions of escalation pathways illuminated a lack of of a shared mental model about clinicians' roles and responsibilities. To optimise timely and appropriate management of patient deterioration, communication infrastructure and interdisciplinary collaboration must be enhanced. What is known about the topic? To promote earlier recognition of, and response to, deteriorating ward patients, Australian rapid response systems include a pre-medical emergency team (pre-MET) tier. Escalation pathways within the pre-MET tier are poorly understood. What does this paper add? Policy-defined escalation pathways were inconsistently utilised. Clinicians identified deficiencies in communication methods (e.g. alphanumeric pagers) for escalating pre-MET deterioration. Perceptions of escalation pathways illuminated a lack of of a shared mental model about clinicians' roles and responsibilities. What are the implications for practitioners? To optimise the management of pre-MET deterioration, ward-based communication infrastructure and interdisciplinary collaboration must be enhanced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic precipitated a major shift in the use of telehealth in Australia. The changes highlighted gaps in our knowledge regarding the efficacy of, and clinician attitudes to, the use of telehealth. The current study expands and deepens the available evidence as a result of being collected in unique circumstances that removed one of the major barriers (lack of Medicare rebates) and also one major enablers (willingness) of telehealth uptake. Methods: Using a semi-structured interview, we invited clinicians (N = 39) to share their perspectives, attitudes and experiences of using telehealth. Topics covered included perceptions of the strengths and challenges of telehealth, and how experience of using telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic had influenced clinicians' views and intentions regarding their future practice. Participants included clinicians from five disciplines across public and private practice: paediatrics, neurology, immunology, rural general practice, and orthopaedics. Results: We found three key dimensions for consideration when assessing the suitability of telehealth for ongoing practice: the attributes of the patient population, the attributes of the clinical context and environment, and the risks and benefits of a telehealth approach. These findings map to the existing literature and allow us to infer that the experiences of clinicians who previously would have chosen telehealth did not differ significantly from those of our 'pandemic-conscripted' clinicians. Conclusions: Our findings map clearly to the existing literature and allow us to infer that the experiences of the clinicians who have chosen telehealth (and are already represented in the literature) did not differ significantly from those trying out telehealth under the unique circumstances of the removal of the Medicare Benefits Scheme barrier and external pressure that over-rides the 'willingness' enabling factor in uptake decisions. What is known about the topic? Clinician and patient experiences of telehealth use have already been documented in contexts where both clinician and patient have opted-in to that process. What does this paper add? The paper adds data on clinician experience across a range of specialities, from a context (pandemic public-heath measures) where the choice element was reduced for both patient and clinician. What are the implications for practitioners? The data speak to the generalisability of existing evidence, but also provide practical considerations in planning for the inclusion of telehealth for specialist health services in the Australian context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Conciliatory attitudes, respect for medical professionals and avoidance of being direct can make health consultations with Burma-born patients difficult to navigate. Coupled with linguistic barriers, this may make the sensitive nature of many women's health consultations challenging. Little is known about current practices for obtaining informed consent in this context. The objectives of this study were to explore current practices, barriers and strategies to obtaining informed consent in medical consultations with women born in Burma. Methods: Purposive and snowball sampling was used to recruit health practitioners (n = 15, 2 male, 13 female) of different ages, years of professional experience, and country of origin, from clinics in Victoria that see a high volume of Burma-born patients. Thirty to sixty minute semi-structured interviews were conducted with four general practitioners, eight nurses and three interpreters, and de-identified audio recordings were transcribed for inductive thematic analysis. Results: Five key themes were generated: (1) cultural cognisance; (2) influence of community; (3) skilful navigation of communication; (4) favourable consultation attributes; and (5) individual tailoring of consent conversations. Differing cultural expectations, and linguistic and educational barriers, were highlighted as challenges to obtaining informed consent, whereas thoughtful utilisation of non-verbal communication, and intentional customisation of consent conversations were identified as facilitators. Conclusion: The findings of this study provide practical ways to optimise the informed consent process within the Australian primary healthcare context, and reinforce that accepted Western-based practices for obtaining informed consent are not a 'one-size-fits-all' process. The increasing cultural and linguistic diversity of Australian society necessitates a better understanding of the practise of cross-cultural medicine. The findings from this study suggest that accepted Western culture-based practices for obtaining informed consent cannot be universally upheld as ideals. Practical insights from this paper help to inform Australian clinicians on how to optimise cross-cultural informed consent with women born in Burma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This pilot study aimed to explore the perceived benefits of a new children's sensory garden in a healthcare centre in south-eastern Melbourne that provides specialised care, support and guidance to parents. Methods: A mixed-method research design was employed in this study comprising a combination of quantitative (surveys) and qualitative (interviews) data collection methods. A total of 19 staff and 36 parents completed surveys relating to their experiences in the new garden. Results: The staff members and parents surveyed were found to use the new children's garden on a regular basis and suggested that the new garden provided them with an opportunity to escape and feel calmer and had positively impacted on their interactions with their child. Interviews were also undertaken with four staff members who indicated that they believe the new garden is affording them perceived personal wellbeing benefits and that the activities in the new garden led to better perceived outcomes for families. Conclusion: The perceived benefits reported provide support for the development of sensory gardens at other similar healthcare facilities. What is known about the topic? The restorative benefits of gardens and other natural features are well known. What does this paper add? Pilot study findings as to whether there are any perceived benefits of accessing a children's sensory garden in a healthcare setting. What are the implications for practitioners? The inclusion of children's gardens could be considered at healthcare facilities to promote wellbeing of staff, patients and visitors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]