Search

Background Rates of suicide appear to be increasing, indicating a critical need for more effective prevention initiatives. To increase the efficacy of future prevention initiatives, we examined the spatial distribution of suicide deaths and suicide attempts in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, to identify where high incidence ‘suicide clusters’ were occurring. Such clusters represent candidate regions where intervention is critically needed, and likely to have the greatest impact, thus providing an evidence-base for the targeted prioritisation of resources. Methods Analysis is based on official suicide mortality statistics for NSW, provided by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, and hospital separations for non-fatal intentional self-harm, provided through the NSW Health Admitted Patient Data Collection at a Statistical Area 2 (SA2) geography. Geographical Information System (GIS) techniques were applied to detect suicide clusters occurring between 2005 and 2013 (aggregated), for persons aged over 5 years. The final dataset contained 5466 mortality and 86,017 non-fatal intentional self-harm cases. Results In total, 25 Local Government Areas were identified as primary or secondary likely candidate regions for intervention. Together, these regions contained approximately 200 SA2 level suicide clusters, which represented 46% (n = 39,869) of hospital separations and 43% (n = 2330) of suicide deaths between 2005 and 2013. These clusters primarily converged on the Eastern coastal fringe of NSW. Conclusions Crude rates of suicide deaths and intentional self-harm differed at the Local Government Areas (LGA) level in NSW. There was a tendency for primary suicide clusters to occur within metropolitan and coastal regions, rather than rural areas. The findings demonstrate the importance of taking geographical variation of suicidal behaviour into account, prior to development and implementation of prevention initiatives, so that such initiatives can target key problem areas where they are likely to have maximal impact.

Background: General practitioner (GP) practices in Australia are increasingly storing patient information in electronic databases. These practice databases can be accessed by clinical audit software to generate reports that inform clinical or population health decision making and public health surveillance. Many audit software applications also have the capacity to generate de-identified patient unit record data. However, the de-identified nature of the extracted data means that these records often lack geographic information. Without spatial references, it is impossible to build maps reflecting the spatial distribution of patients with particular conditions and needs. Links to socioeconomic, demographic, environmental or other geographically based information are also not possible. In some cases, relatively coarse geographies such as postcode are available, but these are of limited use and researchers cannot undertake precision spatial analyses such as calculating travel times. Methods: We describe a method that allows researchers to implement meaningful mapping and spatial epidemiological analyses of practice level patient data while preserving privacy. Results: This solution has been piloted in a diabetes risk research project in the patient population of a practice in Adelaide. Conclusions and Implications: The method offers researchers a powerful means of analysing geographic clinic data in a privacy-protected manner.

Contains fulltext : 154830.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) continues to be a leading cause of illness and death among adults worldwide. The objective of this study was to calculate a CVD risk score from general practice (GP) clinical records and assess spatial variations of CVD risk in communities. METHODS: We used GP clinical data for 4,740 men and women aged 30 to 74 years with no history of CVD. A 10-year absolute CVD risk score was calculated based on the Framingham risk equation. The individual risk scores were aggregated within each Statistical Area Level One (SA1) to predict the level of CVD risk in that area. Finally, the pattern of CVD risk was visualized to highlight communities with high and low risk of CVD. RESULTS: The overall 10-year risk of CVD in our sample population was 14.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.3%-14.9%). Of the 4,740 patients in our study, 26.7% were at high risk, 29.8% were at moderate risk, and 43.5% were at low risk for CVD over 10 years. The proportion of patients at high risk for CVD was significantly higher in the communities of low socioeconomic status. CONCLUSION: This study illustrates methods to further explore prevalence, location, and correlates of CVD to identify communities of high levels of unmet need for cardiovascular care and to enable geographic targeting of effective interventions for enhancing early and timely detection and management of CVD in those communities.

Background To develop a method to use survey data to establish catchment areas of primary care or Primary Care Service Areas. Primary Care Service Areas are small areas, the majority of patients resident in which obtain their primary care services from within the geography. Methods The data are from a large health survey (n =267,153, year 2006–2009) linked to General Practitioner service use data (year 2002–2010) from New South Wales, Australia. Our methods broadly follow those used previously by researchers in the United States of America and Switzerland, with significant modifications to improve robustness. This algorithm allocates post code areas to Primary Care Service Areas that receive the plurality of patient visits from the post code area. Results Consistent with international findings the median Localization Index or the median percentage of patients that obtain their primary care from within a Primary Care Service Area is 55% with localization increasing with rurality. Conclusions With the additional methodological refinements in this study, Australian Primary Care Service Areas have great potential to be of value to policymakers and researchers. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1476-072X-13-38) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objectives To estimate undiagnosed diabetes prevalence from general practitioner (GP) practice data and identify areas with high levels of undiagnosed and diagnosed diabetes. Design Data from the North-West Adelaide Health Survey (NWAHS) were used to develop a model which predicts total diabetes at a small area. This model was then applied to cross-sectional data from general practices to predict the total level of expected diabetes. The difference between total expected and already diagnosed diabetes was defined as undiagnosed diabetes prevalence and was estimated for each small area. The patterns of diagnosed and undiagnosed diabetes were mapped to highlight the areas of high prevalence. Setting North-West Adelaide, Australia. Participants This study used two population samples—one from the de-identified GP practice data (n=9327 active patients, aged 18 years and over) and another from NWAHS (n=4056, aged 18 years and over). Main outcome measures Total diabetes prevalence, diagnosed and undiagnosed diabetes prevalence at GP practice and Statistical Area Level 1. Results Overall, it was estimated that there was one case of undiagnosed diabetes for every 3–4 diagnosed cases among the 9327 active patients analysed. The highest prevalence of diagnosed diabetes was seen in areas of lower socioeconomic status. However, the prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes was substantially higher in the least disadvantaged areas. Conclusions The method can be used to estimate population prevalence of diabetes from general practices wherever these data are available. This approach both flags the possibility that undiagnosed diabetes may be a problem of less disadvantaged social groups, and provides a tool to identify areas with high levels of unmet need for diabetes care which would enable policy makers to apply geographic targeting of effective interventions.