Search

Background This paper aims to assess the barriers and solutions to the delivery of eye care in primary care settings and solutions to improve the use of comprehensive eye care among Indigenous Australians. Design, setting, participants Qualitative, mixed method study participants include Aboriginal community members, and health and eye care providers in urban, rural and remote settings. Main outcome measures Present evidence for health care providers to better understand and address some of the barriers that limit access to eye care in primary care settings. Results Patient perspectives on barriers to accessing eye care and reasons they choose to seek care or not are presented. Health system barriers identified by health and eye care providers are also presented. Additionally, key enablers for improving access to eye care through primary care services are identified. Conclusion Primary health care services have an important role in Indigenous eye health. There is a critical role for primary care in the coordination of the patient journey and cooperating with other services to improve access to comprehensive eye care. Through improved provision of primary eye care, monitoring of Indigenous eye health indicators and supporting patients to access eye care, it is possible to close the gap for vision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Secondary prevention is essential in reducing recurrence of diabetes‐related foot disease (DFD) but is frequently poorly implemented in clinical practice. Objective: To explore the perceptions of people with diabetes‐related foot disease (DFD) on their self‐perceived knowledge in managing DFD, facilitators and barriers influencing their DFD care, and ideas and preferences for a secondary prevention program. Design: Sixteen people with a history of DFD from Queensland and Victoria, Australia, underwent semi‐structured interviews. Interviews were audio‐recorded over telephone and transcribed and analysed following a thematic framework. Participants were asked about their experiences and perceptions relating to DFD and factors influencing the care they receive for DFD relevant to the development of a secondary prevention program for DFD. Findings and discussion: Participants had high self‐perceived knowledge in managing DFD, especially in implementing healthy lifestyle changes and conducting daily foot checks and foot care, though most received support from family members acting as carers. However, issues with access and adherence to offloading footwear, and a lack of clear education received on footwear and other aspects of DFD care were perceived as major barriers. Improved patient education, provided in a consistent manner by proactive clinicians was perceived as an essential part of secondary prevention. Telehealth was perceived positively through facilitating faster care and considered a good adjunct to standard care. Health and technological literacy were considered potentially major barriers to the effectiveness of remote care. Conclusion: People with DFD require improved access to offloading footwear and education about secondary prevention, which could be provided by telehealth with adequate support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]