Search

Objective: To describe patterns of use of the available Government-subsidised mental health services among people living in Australian residential aged care facilities. Methods: A retrospective population-based trend analysis was conducted, including all non-Indigenous people living in an Australian facility between 2012 and 2017. Adjusted incidence proportions and trends were estimated for four groups of mental health services. Results: The use of Medicare-subsidised mental health services was very low overall. The proportion of residents who accessed primary care mental health services increased from 1.3% in 2012/2013 to 2.4% in 2016/2017, while psychiatry service use increased from 1.9 to 2.3%. Claims for clinical psychology increased from 0.18 to 0.26%, and claims for a registered psychologist, occupational therapist or social worker rose from 0.45 to 1.2%. People with dementia were less likely than people without dementia to access all services aside from psychiatry services. Conclusions: Less than 3% of residents accessed funding subsidies for mental health services and people with dementia experienced pronounced barriers to service access. Mental health care is a pillar of the publicly-funded health system in Australia, and low use of these services among aged care residents indicates a need for organisational and policy changes to improve access. What is known about the topic? People living in residential aged care facilities report very high rates of mental health conditions, including depression and anxiety. What does this paper add? We demonstrate very low use (<3%) of Government-funded mental health services among people living in residential aged care facilities in Australia, with only small increases in use over time. What are the implications for practitioners? Practitioners should routinely assess the mental health needs of people living in residential aged care and refer for in-reach mental health services where needed, noting that facility staff are usually not trained for this role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to identify the factors contributing to high-quality clinical supervision of the allied health workforce in rural and remote settings. Methods: This quantitative study was part of a broader project that used a mixed-methods sequential explanatory design. Participants were 159 allied health professionals from two Australian states. Quantitative data were collected using an online customised survey and the Manchester Clinical Supervision Scale (MCSS-26). Data were analysed using regression analyses. Results: Supervisee's work setting and choice of supervisor were found to have a positive and significant influence on clinical supervision quality. Supervisee profession and time in work role were found to have a negative and significant influence on the quality of clinical supervision. Conclusions: High-quality clinical supervision is essential to achieve quality and safety of health care, as well as to support the health workforce. Information on high-quality clinical supervision identified in this study can be applied to clinical supervision practices in rural and remote settings, and to professional support policies and training to enhance the quality of supervision. What is known about the topic?: There is mounting evidence on the benefits of clinical supervision to health professionals, organisations and patients. Clinical supervision enhances recruitment and retention of the health workforce. However, there are still gaps regarding the factors that contribute to high-quality clinical supervision, especially for rural and remote health professionals. What does this paper add?: This study, the first of its kind, recruited rural and remote health professionals from seven allied health disciplines across two Australian states. It investigated the factors that influence high-quality clinical supervision in this under-resourced group. This paper outlines specific factors that contribute to clinical supervision quality for rural and remote allied health professionals. What are the implications for practitioners?: Effective and high-quality clinical supervision of the rural and remote allied health workforce can enhance recruitment and retention in those areas. Healthcare organisations can facilitate effective clinical supervision delivery by using the evidence gathered in this study in clinical supervision policy, training and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]