Search

In Australia the impacts of climate change are resulting in considerable water scarcity, a scenario affecting the green and blue spaces that provide well-recognized individual health benefits. However, far less is known about the social health benefits of these spaces, particularly for those residing in rural Australian river communities. In this geographic context, water issues are compounded by a dominant culture that privileges the commodification of water for agricultural purposes over other interests. Using an environmental justice perspective consistent with a green social work approach, this proof-of-concept study contributes a critical element to water debates by examining the cultural, recreational, and environmental meanings of water for the rural river community of Mildura. Results from an online mixed-methods questionnaire (N = 33) show that people privileged cultural meanings of water as fundamental to life, were concerned for river health, and felt marginalized in water debates. Findings suggest that understanding communities' hydrosocial relationships is key to environmentally and socially just water management and to individual, community, and environmental health. Social work can contribute to such environmental issues by working collaboratively to enable communities to exercise their voices and to advocate to decision makers to include consideration of environmental, social, and cultural impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To understand the experience of audiologists in managing and treating ear‐related ear, nose and throat conditions in rural areas, and to identify the compounding factors that influence patient outcomes and potential targets for intervention. Design: A focus group was conducted using a qualitative descriptive approach. Responses were audio‐recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed. Setting: The focus group was conducted in the rural town of Mildura in the state of Victoria, Australia. Participants: A sample of 19 audiologists from Victoria participated, of which 14 were rurally based and 5 were metropolitan‐based. The length of participants' professional experience ranged from 1 to 43 years. Results: Long wait lists, and a lack of locally based ear, nose and throat surgeons were identified as barriers to the treatment of ear‐related ear, nose and throat conditions. Open communication between health services and efficient care for time‐sensitive conditions were seen as outcomes of good practice. Hand hygiene, nose‐blowing, reducing tobacco smoke exposure and promoting the use of noise protective equipment were the 4 community health campaigns mentioned to support ear care for those residing in rural areas. Additional themes of ear conditions, treatment, management and primary health care were identified. Conclusion: Improving referral pathways for the treatment of ear‐related ear, nose and throat conditions, and providing education about ear, nose and throat assessment and treatment in primary health care settings could increase appropriate referrals, improve patient outcomes and reduce wait periods for treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]