Search

Background: Many pharmacists practise in settings in which protecting privacy can be difficult. To address this, some community pharmacies are rearranging their retail space to provide private areas for clinical consultations. Such facilities are deemed particularly important when dealing with clients who have sensitive medical conditions, such as opioid dependence.Objective: To explore Opioid Substitution Treatment (OST) patients' perceptions of privacy in a community pharmacy setting, with a particular focus on the layout of the community pharmacy.Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with OST clients. Recruitment and the interviews were conducted at state government drug and alcohol clinic. The interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. The data were analysed in NVivo using the framework approach.Results: We interviewed fourteen OST clients. Most participants were concerned about privacy and considered that the pharmacy layout could enhance or hinder privacy. However, they disagreed about exactly which pharmacy layout was most privacy-protecting. In addition, a small group of clients interviewed who had a very positive relationship with pharmacists believed that the relationship contributed to their confidence that their privacy was protected.Conclusions: There is little consensus amongst consumers about how to protect privacy in the community pharmacy. The range of views expressed by clients in this study may reflect the lack of consensus about the nature of privacy in health ethics. Attention to the meaning of and rationales for privacy protections may be helpful when designing pharmacy layouts to meet the needs of a broad range of consumers. An enclosed or screened private area which can be used as a consultation area for all private pharmacy discussions, including for OST dosing, could be a solution to addressing these varying views on privacy in the pharmacy. Further attention to enhancing the pharmacist and client relationship may assist in reducing sensitivity about privacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a shortage of medical practitioners able and/or willing to prescribe OST. This qualitative study investigated an alternative model of care where by pharmacists co-prescribed with an accredited doctor for OST patients. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews with 14 OST patients were conducted at a state government drug and alcohol clinic about their views on pharmacist prescribing OST for them. In the second phase of the study, three focus group interviews with 18 pharmacists were conducted to explore their views on a policy proposal which would allow them to co-prescribe for OST patients. Transcripts were analysed using the five-step framework approach with the support of the software package NVivo. In general, both patients and pharmacists supported co-prescribing. Improved patient continuity of care and convenience were regarded as the main benefits of having a pharmacist co-prescriber. Continued doctor involvement with patient was supported under a co-prescribing model, but not all pharmacists may desire or be suitable to fulfil the role of a co-prescriber. Changes to health care relationships and provisions to ensure adequate support of pharmacist co-prescribers were important consideration factors in moving forward with this proposed new model of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Adolescents’ views, and preferences are often over-looked when public health policies that affect them are designed and implemented. The purpose of this study was to describe young people's views and preferences for determining government funding priorities for adolescent immunization programs. Methods In 2015 we conducted a youth jury in metropolitan Adelaide, South Australia to deliberate on the question “What criteria should we use to decide which vaccines for young people in Australia should receive public funding?” Fifteen youth aged 15–19 years participated in the jury. Jury members were recruited from the general community through a market research company using a stratified sampling technique. Results The jury's key priorities for determining publically funded vaccines were: Disease severity – whether the vaccine preventable disease (VPD) was life threatening and impacted on quality of life. Transmissibility – VPDs with high/fast transmission and high prevalence. Demonstration of cost-effectiveness, taking into account purchase price, program administration, economic and societal gain. The jury's recommendations for vaccine funding policy were strongly underpinned by the belief that it was critical to ensure that funding was targeted to not only population groups who would be medically at risk from vaccine preventable diseases, but also to socially and economically disadvantaged population groups. A novel recommendation proposed by the jury was that there should be a process for establishing criteria to remove vaccines from publically funded programs as a complement to the process for adding new vaccines. Conclusions Young people have valuable contributions to make in priority setting for health programs and their views should be incorporated into the framing of health policies that directly affect them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This paper draws on semi-structured interviews conducted with 36 older men to examine how older men''s understandings of independence relate to their help seeking behaviours and health service use. We argue that discourses of masculinity and successful aging are both represented in men''s talk about independence. Recognising that these discourses are intertwined is important for understanding how older men seek help and use health services. We outline the practice and policy implications of viewing older men''s help seeking behaviours in this way, and how it might be useful for promoting older men''s health. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Examines the role that casuistry, a model of bioethical reasoning developed by Jonsen and Toulmin, plays in ordinary moral reasoning. Description of the casuistry method; Review of empirical arguments of Jonsen and Toulmin to show that everyday moral decision-making is casuistric.

This study compared community response prior to and during the H1N1 2009 influenza pandemic using a cross-sectional phone survey of rural and metropolitan South Australia, conducted in 2007 and 2009. Awareness of pandemic influenza was significantly higher and anxiety lower in 2009 than in 2007. Reported seasonal influenza vaccine uptake increased from 51.7% in 2007 to 61.4% in 2009, but there was more interest in receiving pandemic vaccine in 2007 (87.5%) than in 2009 (57%). [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Alongside the promise of improving clinical work, advances in healthcare artificial intelligence (AI) raise concerns about the risk of deskilling clinicians. This purpose of this study is to examine the issue of deskilling from the perspective of diverse group of professional stakeholders with knowledge and/or experiences in the development, deployment and regulation of healthcare AI.Methods: We conducted qualitative, semi-structured interviews with 72 professionals with AI expertise and/or professional or clinical expertise who were involved in development, deployment and/or regulation of healthcare AI. Data analysis using combined constructivist grounded theory and framework approach was performed concurrently with data collection.Findings: Our analysis showed participants had diverse views on three contentious issues regarding AI and deskilling. The first involved competing views about the proper extent of AI-enabled automation in healthcare work, and which clinical tasks should or should not be automated. We identified a cluster of characteristics of tasks that were considered more suitable for automation. The second involved expectations about the impact of AI on clinical skills, and whether AI-enabled automation would lead to worse or better quality of healthcare. The third tension implicitly contrasted two models of healthcare work: a human-centric model and a technology-centric model. These models assumed different values and priorities for healthcare work and its relationship to AI-enabled automation.Conclusion: Our study shows that a diverse group of professional stakeholders involved in healthcare AI development, acquisition, deployment and regulation are attentive to the potential impact of healthcare AI on clinical skills, but have different views about the nature and valence (positive or negative) of this impact. Detailed engagement with different types of professional stakeholders allowed us to identify relevant concepts and values that could guide decisions about AI algorithm development and deployment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Obesity remains a major public health challenge across OECD countries and policy-makers globally require successful policy precedents. This paper analyzes New York City’s innovative experiences in regulatory approaches to nutrition. We combined a systematic documentary review and key informant interviews ( n = 9) with individuals directly involved in nutrition policy development and decision-making. Thematic analysis was guided by Kingdon’s three-streams-model and the International Obesity Task Force’s evidence-based decision-making framework. Our findings indicate that decisive mayoral leadership spearheaded initial agenda-change and built executive capacity to support evidence-driven policy. Policy-makers in the executive branch recognized the dearth of evidence for concrete policy interventions, and made contributing to the evidence base an explicit goal. Their approach preferred decision-making through executive action and rules passed by the Board of Health that successfully banned trans-fats from food outlets, set institutional food standards, introduced menu labeling requirements for chain restaurants, and improved access to healthy foods for disadvantaged populations. Although the Health Department collaborated with the legislature on legal and programmatic food access measures, there was limited engagement with elected representatives and the community on regulatory obesity prevention. Our analysis suggests that this hurt the administration’s ability to successfully communicate the public health messages motivating these contentious proposals; contributing to unexpected opposition from food access and minority advocates, and fueling charges of executive overreach. Overall, NYC presents a case of expert-driven policy change, underpinned by evidence-based environmental approaches. The city’s experience demonstrates that there is scope to redefine municipal responsibilities for public health and that incremental change and contentious public discussion can impact social norms around nutrition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Deliberative forums can be useful tools in policy decision making for balancing citizen voice and community values against dominant interests.Objective: To describe the use of a deliberative forum to explore community perspectives on a complex health problem-disinvestment.Methods: A deliberative forum of citizens was convened in Adelaide, South Australia, to develop criteria to support disinvestment from public funding of ineffective pathology tests. The case study of potential disinvestment from vitamin B12/folate pathology testing was used to shape the debate. The forum was informed by a systematic review of B12/folate pathology test effectiveness and expert testimony.Results: The citizens identified seven criteria: cost of the test, potential impact on individual health/capacity to benefit, potential cost to society, public good, alternatives to testing, severity of the condition, and accuracy of the test. The participants not only saw these criteria as an interdependent network but also questioned "the authority" of policymakers to make these decisions.Conclusions: Coherence between the criteria devised by the forum and those described by an expert group was considerable, the major differences being that the citizens did not consider equity issues and the experts neglected the "cost" of social and emotional impact of disinvestment on users and the society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Mortality and morbidity due to HPV related diseases continues to be high globally. • Little was known about what influences parents decision-making in ASEAN counties. • We found high acceptance and uptake of free vaccine despite poor knowledge. • Research is needed to maintain these levels when the vaccine is not offered for free. Cervical cancer is the second most common malignancy affecting females in Southeast Asia. Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines have been available since 2006. Several Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) member countries have since introduced and/or piloted the HPV vaccine with adolescent females. This systematic review was conducted to understand what factors influence parents' acceptance of the HPV vaccine in the region. Seven databases were searched for qualitative and quantitative studies published up to 16 April 2020. Papers were included if they were peer-reviewed, in English, available in full text, and had a focus on parents' knowledge, beliefs, attitudes and acceptance of the HPV vaccine. Findings were integrated to answer the review question using framework analysis based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Sixteen publications were included and synthesised under the Theory of Planned Behaviour domains: 1) Knowledge, attitudes and acceptance, 2) subjective norms, and 3) perceived behavioural control. Parents' attitudes to HPV vaccination were positive and acceptance to vaccinate their daughters against HPV was high. The uptake was high when the vaccine was offered for free. Parents' acceptance and uptake of the HPV vaccine in ASEAN member-countries was high when the vaccine was offered for free even though their knowledge of cervical cancer and HPV was poor. Further research is needed to see how uptake and acceptance can be maintain when the vaccine is not offered for free. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Deliberative inclusive approaches, such as citizen juries, have been used to engage citizens on a range of issues in health care and public health. Researchers engaging with the public to inform policy and practice have adapted the citizen jury method in a variety of ways. The nature and impact of these adaptations has not been evaluated. We systematically searched Medline (PubMED), CINAHL and Scopus databases to identify deliberative inclusive methods, particularly citizens' juries and their adaptations, deployed in health research. Identified studies were evaluated focussing on principles associated with deliberative democracy: inclusivity, deliberation and active citizenship. We examined overall process, recruitment, evidence presentation, documentation and outputs in empirical studies, and the relationship of these elements to theoretical explications of deliberative inclusive methods. The search yielded 37 papers describing 66 citizens' juries. The review demonstrated that the citizens' jury model has been extensively adapted. Inclusivity has been operationalised with sampling strategies that aim to recruit representative juries, although these efforts have produced mixed results. Deliberation has been supported through use of steering committees and facilitators to promote fair interaction between jurors. Many juries were shorter duration than originally recommended, limiting opportunity for constructive dialogue. With respect to citizenship, few juries' rulings were considered by decision-making bodies thereby limiting transfer into policy and practice. Constraints in public policy process may preclude use of the ‘ideal’ citizens' jury with potential loss of an effective method for informed community engagement. Adapted citizens' jury models provide an alternative: however, this review demonstrates that special attention should be paid to recruitment, independent oversight, jury duration and moderation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Highlights: [•] Use of adolescent and community views may lead to greater support for the SBIP. [•] Community and adolescent views on the SBIP provided unique insights for improvement. [•] Citizens juries offer a unique and rigorous methodology for accessing community and adolescent views to impact policy and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights: [•] High coverage for adolescent vaccinations is achieved through schools in Australia. [•] This large community survey showed strong support for school based programs. [•] Support for school vaccine program highest amongst parents of high school students. [•] Rural residents more supportive of family physician delivery of adolescent vaccines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: High school-based introductory occupational safety education has become common and serves an important role in preparing students for entry into the workforce. However, the practices and perspectives of teachers have received limited attention. We sought to gather empirical data from high schools in South Australia and examine potential predictors of effective safety education. Focus groups and interviews with teachers and school to work advisors were undertaken and a questionnaire survey of teachers conducted. Potential predictors of perceived effective learning were grouped in terms of teacher-, school- and teaching-related characteristics. Of the 156 respondents from 103 schools, 16% had received no formal safety training, 86% felt that the school management was supportive, and 36% felt that their ability to teach the topic effectively was compromised due to other demands of their role. Although general learning guidelines were available, there was variability in the time spent, teaching methods and resources used. In a multivariate model, perceived student engagement was significantly associated with the use of case studies (adjusted odds ratio=2.2). The teaching of occupational safety in high schools would benefit by a standardized yet engaging approach, incorporating case studies. In-service teacher training with more explicit guidance on effective content and delivery is recommended. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Introduction: We aimed to determine demographic predictors of parental vaccine safety and risk perceptions, and assess the relationship between the occurrence of children''s perceived adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) on parents’ opinions. Methods: Computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATI) were conducted in 2011 with a cross-sectional, random general population sample of rural and metropolitan residents in South Australia. Multivariate ordinal logistic regression analyses examined associations between parental vaccine safety attitudes and socio-demographic factors, adjusting for whether children had ever experienced a previous suspected AEFI. Results: Of 469 parents interviewed, 95% were confident in vaccine safety in general, but almost half expressed concern for pre-licensure testing of vaccines. Of all parents, 41% responded that at least one of their children had experienced an AEFI. Almost one third of the AEFI parent group indicated they reported their children''s symptoms to either a healthcare professional or the Department of Health. Parental acceptability of the risks of febrile convulsion and anaphylaxis were 73% and 76% respectively. Ordinal logistic regression analyses showed parents of children who had experienced a suspected AEFI were associated with greater concern for vaccine safety (OR:0.53, p ≤0.01) and more were likely to expect either a mild or a serious AEFI. After adjusting for demographics, parental confidence in vaccine safety was significantly associated with higher levels of education (OR:2.58, p =0.01) and being born in Australia OR:2.30, p =0.004. Mothers, when compared with fathers, were less accepting of the two vaccine risks presented: febrile convulsion (OR:0.57, p =0.04) and anaphylaxis, (OR:0.55, p =0.04). Conclusions: Parents commonly perceive and report that their child has experienced an AEFI. In this group of parents the subsequent expectation of an AEFI and vaccine safety concerns may be heightened. Further research should investigate parental understandings of differentiating an expected event from an adverse event as this could inform immunization risk communication and consumer AEFI reporting strategies. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Introduction: We sought community opinion on consent alternatives when linking childhood immunisation and hospital attendance records for the purpose of vaccine safety surveillance. Methods: We conducted computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) of a sample of rural and metropolitan residents of South Australia in 2011. Results: Of 2002 households interviewed (response rate 55.6%), 96.4% supported data linkage for postmarketing surveillance of vaccines; very few were completely opposed (1.5%) or undecided (2.2%). The majority (75.3%) trusted the privacy protections used in data linkage and most wished to have minimal or no direct involvement, preferring either opt-out consent (40.4%) or no consent (30.6%). A quarter of respondents (24.6%) favoured opt-in consent, but their preferences were divergent; half requested consent be sought prior to every use (11.4%) while the remainder preferred to give broad consent just once (3.4%) or renewed at periodic intervals (9.8%). Over half of the respondents gave higher priority to rapid vaccine safety surveillance (56.5%) rather than first seeking parental consent (26.6%) and one in seven was undecided (14.5%). Although 91.6% of respondents believed childhood vaccines are safe, over half (53.1%) were very or somewhat concerned that a vaccine could cause a serious reaction. Nevertheless, 92.4% of the parents in the sample (556/601) reported every child in their care as being fully immunised according to the National Immunisation Program schedule. Only 3.7% of parents (22/601) reported one or more children as under immunised, and 3.9% (23/601) reported that none of their children were immunised. Conclusions: This survey demonstrates that data linkage for vaccine safety surveillance has substantial community support and that a system utilising opt-out consent or no consent was preferred to one using opt-in consent. These findings should inform public health policy and practice; data linkage should be established where feasible to address limitations in passive surveillance systems. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Background: Since 2006 Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination has become available to adolescent girls and women in an increasing number of countries, to protect against the virus causing cervical cancer. The vaccine series is offered in three doses over 6 months, and this study aimed to identify factors associated with initiation and/or completion of the 3 dose series in (pre-) adolescent girls. Previous studies have considered intention to vaccinate rather than actual vaccination uptake. Methods: A systematic search of Medline, Medline in process, Embase and CINAHL, from 2006 to March 2011 for articles related to HPV-vaccine uptake among adolescent girls and factors potentially associated with uptake yielded 25 studies. Results: The majority of studies were surveys or retrospective reviews of data, only 5 studies reported data on program completion. Most were conducted in the United States (20/25). Higher vaccine uptake was associated with having health insurance, of older age, receipt of childhood vaccines, a higher vaccine related knowledge, more healthcare utilization, having a healthcare provider as a source of information and positive vaccine attitudes. In US settings, African American girls were less likely to have either initiated or completed the three dose vaccination series. Conclusions: HPV vaccination programs should focus on narrowing disparities in vaccine receipt in ethnic and racial groups and on providing correct information by a reliable source, e.g. healthcare providers. School-based vaccination programs have a high vaccine uptake. More studies are required to determine actual vaccine course completion and factors related to high uptake and completion, and information from a broader range of developed and developing settings is needed. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Despite attempts at clear direction in international, national and journal guidelines, attribution of authorship can be a confusing area for both new and established researchers. As journal articles are valuable intellectual property, authorship can be hotly contested. Individual authors'' responsibilities for the integrity of article content have not been well explored. Semi-structured interviews (n = 17) were conducted with staff, student advocates and doctoral candidates working in health research in two universities in Australia. Stratified sampling ensured participants reflected a range of experience across biomedical, clinical and social science disciplines. Participants were asked about their experience with research publication and their views on the responsibilities of authorship. Participants gave a variety of reasons for attribution of authorship including: writing the paper; seniority; and student supervision. Gift authorship was seen by some participants as: a way of maintaining relationships; a reward; a means to increase a paper''s credibility; or a demonstration of collaboration between authors. Norms and beliefs differed markedly between disciplines for authorship attribution and, to a lesser extent, for authors'' responsibility for content integrity. Discussions about the effect of power differentials on authorship were common across disciplines. This paper describes a broad range of beliefs, values and practice norms held by health science researchers with respect to attribution of authorship and author responsibility for scientific publications. The findings support the need for clarity in relation to authorship, and a research environment which is supportive of ethical behaviour in the publication of research. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]