Search

Objective Improving access to primary health care (PHC) remains a key issue for rural residents and health service planners. This study aims to show that how access to PHC services is measured has important implications for rural health service and workforce planning. Methods A more sophisticated tool to measure access to PHC services is proposed, which can help health service planners overcome the shortcomings of existing measures and long-standing access barriers to PHC. Critically, the proposed Index of Access captures key components of access and uses a floating catchment approach to better define service areas and population accessibility levels. Moreover, as demonstrated through a case study, the Index of Access enables modelling of the effects of workforce supply variations. Results Hypothetical increases in supply are modelled for a range of regional centres, medium and small rural towns, with resulting changes of access scores valuable to informing health service and workforce planning decisions. Conclusions The availability and application of a specific 'fit-for-purpose' access measure enables a more accurate empirical basis for service planning and allocation of health resources. This measure has great potential for improved identification of PHC access inequities and guiding redistribution of PHC services to correct such inequities. What is known about the topic? Resource allocation and health service planning decisions for rural and remote health settings are currently based on either simple measures of access (e.g. provider-to-population ratios) or proxy measures of access (e.g. standard geographical classifications). Both approaches have substantial limitations for informing rural health service planning and decision making. What does this paper add? The adoption of a new improved tool to measure access to PHC services, the Index of Access, is proposed to assist health service and workforce planning. Its usefulness for health service planning is demonstrated using a case study to hypothetically model changes in rural PHC workforce supply. What are the implications for practitioners? The Index of Access has significant potential for identifying how rural and remote primary health care access inequities can be addressed. This critically important information can assist health service planners, for example those working in primary health networks, to determine where and how much redistribution of PHC services is needed to correct existing inequities.

Introduction: A Centre of Research Excellence (CRE) in Rural and Remote Primary Healthcare was established in 2012 with the goal of providing evidence to inform policy development to increase equity of access to quality health care and the identification of services that should be available to the diverse communities characterising Australia. This article reports on the key findings from seven CRE service evaluations to better understand what made these primary health care (PHC) models work where they worked, and why., Methods: We conducted a narrative synthesis of 15 articles reporting on seven CRE service evaluations of different PHC models published between 2012 and 2015., Results: Three different contexts for PHC reform were evaluated: community, regional and clinic based. Themes identified were factors that enabled changes to PHC delivery, processes that supported services to improve access to PHC and requirements for service adaptation to promote sustainability. In both Indigenous and mainstream community settings, the active engagement with local communities, and their participation in, or leadership of, shared decision-making was reported across the three themes. In addition, local governance processes, informed by service activity and impact data, enabled these service changes to be sustained over time. The considerations were different for the outreach, regional and clinic services that relied on internal processes to drive change because they did not require the cooperation of multiple organisations to succeed., Conclusions: The review highlighted that shared decision-making, negotiation and consultation with communities is important and should be used to promote feasible strategies that improve access to community-based PHC services. There is a growing need for service evaluations to report on the feasibility, acceptability and fit of successful service models within context, in addition to reach and effectiveness in order to provide evidence for local dissemination, adaption and implementation strategies.

Introduction: The study identifies the differences between rural health and remote health and describes key distinctive characteristics of remote health., Methods: The study used a mixed method approach of interviews and questionnaires (utilising a Likert scale) with expert stakeholders in rural health and remote health. A total of 45 interviews were conducted with experts selected from every state and territory of Australia. Of these, 41 also completed a questionnaire, of which 21 respondents were female, 20 identified predominantly as academics while six, five and five indicated that they worked in policy, advocacy and as a practitioner, respectively. Thirteen worked in rural health, 10 in remote health and 18 in both; 23 participants worked in Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander health. Respondents had worked in rural health or remote health for mean periods of 13 years and 8 years, respectively., Results: Means for each of 15 characteristics indicated that respondents viewed each characteristic as different in remote health compared to rural health. Interviews confirmed these perceived differences, with particular emphasis on isolation, poor service access and the relatively high proportion of Indigenous residents. Those working in remote and Aboriginal health most strongly identified these distinctions., Conclusions: A detailed and rigorous description of the discipline of remote health, and the differences to rural health, will assist policymakers, health planners, teachers and researchers to develop an appropriate workforce, models of service delivery and policy that are relevant, appropriate and effective in order to ensure a more equitable distribution of resources and health outcomes across this vast continent.

Poor spatial access to health care remains a key issue for rural populations worldwide. Whilst geographic information systems (GIS) have enabled the development of more sophisticated access measures, they are yet to be adopted into health policy and workforce planning. This paper provides and tests a new national-level approach to measuring primary health care (PHC) access for rural Australia, suitable for use in macro-level health policy. The new index was constructed using a modified two-step floating catchment area method framework and the smallest available geographic unit. Primary health care spatial access was operationalised using three broad components: availability of PHC (general practitioner) services; proximity of populations to PHC services; and PHC needs of the population. Data used in its measurement were specifically chosen for accuracy, reliability and ongoing availability for small areas. The resultant index reveals spatial disparities of access to PHC across rural Australia. While generally more remote areas experienced poorer access than more populated rural areas, there were numerous exceptions to this generalisation, with some rural areas close to metropolitan areas having very poor access and some increasingly remote areas having relatively good access. This new index provides a geographically-sensitive measure of access, which is readily updateable and enables a fine granulation of access disparities. Such an index can underpin national rural health programmes and policies designed to improve rural workforce recruitment and retention, and, importantly, health service planning and resource allocation decisions designed to improve equity of PHC access.

Introduction: Australians in rural and remote areas experience poorer health status compared with many metropolitan residents, due partly to inequitable access to primary health care (PHC) services. Building on recent research that identified PHC services which all Australians should be able to access regardless of where they live, this paper aims to define the population thresholds governing which PHC services would be best provided by a resident health worker, and to outline attendant implementation issues., Methods: A Delphi method comprising panellists with expertise in rural, remote and/or Indigenous PHC was used. Five population thresholds reflecting Australia's diverse rural and remote geography were devised. Panellists participated in two electronic surveys. Using a Likert scale, they were asked at what population threshold each PHC service should be provided by a resident health worker. A follow-up focus group identified important underlying principles which guided the consensus process., Results: Response rates were high. The population thresholds for core PHC services provided by a resident worker were less in remote communities compared with rural communities. For example, the population threshold for 'care of the sick and injured,' was ≤100 for remote compared with 101-500 for rural communities. For 'mental health', 'maternal/child health', 'sexual health' and 'public health' services in remote communities the population threshold was 101-500, compared to 501-1000 for rural communities. Principles underpinning implementation included the fundamental importance of equity; consideration of social determinants of health; flexibility, effective expenditure of resources, tailoring services to ensure consumer acceptability, prioritising services according to need, and providing services as close to home as possible., Conclusion: This research can assist policy makers and service planners to determine the population thresholds at which PHC services should be delivered by a resident health worker, to allocate resources and provide services more equitably, and inform consumers about PHC services they can reasonably expect to access in their community. This framework assists in developing a systematic approach to strategies seeking to address existing rural-urban health workforce maldistribution, including the training of generalists as opposed to specialists, and providing necessary infrastructure in communities most in need.

Background: Poor access to doctors at times of need remains a significant impediment to achieving good health for many rural residents. The two-step floating catchment area (2SFCA) method has emerged as a key tool for measuring healthcare access in rural areas. However, the choice of catchment size, a key component of the 2SFCA method, is problematic because little is known about the distance tolerance of rural residents for health-related travel. Our study sought new evidence to test the hypothesis that residents of sparsely settled rural areas are prepared to travel further than residents of closely settled rural areas when accessing primary health care at times of need., Methods: A questionnaire survey of residents in five small rural communities of Victoria and New South Wales in Australia was used. The two outcome measures were current travel time to visit their usual doctor and maximum time prepared to travel to visit a doctor, both for non-emergency care. Kaplan-Meier charts were used to compare the association between increased distance and decreased travel propensity for closely-settled and sparsely-settled areas, and ordinal multivariate regression models tested significance after controlling for health-related travel moderating factors and town clustering., Results: A total of 1079 questionnaires were completed with 363 from residents in closely-settled locations and 716 from residents in sparsely-settled areas. Residents of sparsely-settled communities travel, on average, 10 min further than residents of closely-settled communities (26.3 vs 16.9 min, p < 0.001), though this difference was not significant after controlling for town clustering. Differences were more apparent in terms of maximum time prepared to travel (54.1 vs 31.9 min, p < 0.001). Differences of maximum time remained significant after controlling for demographic and other constraints to access, such as transport availability or difficulties getting doctor appointments, as well as after controlling for town clustering and current travel times., Conclusions: Improved geographical access remains a key issue underpinning health policies designed to improve the provision of rural primary health care services. This study provides empirical evidence that travel behaviour should not be implicitly assumed constant amongst rural populations when modelling access through methods like the 2SFCA.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of a comprehensive primary health care service model on key health performance indicators in a remote region of Australia., Design and Setting: A cross-sectional 6-year retrospective evaluation of the results of a health service partnership between an Aboriginal community controlled health service, a hospital and a community health service in north-west Western Australia., Intervention: Integration of health promotion, health assessments and chronic disease management with an acute primary health care service as a result of the formal partnership., Main Outcome Measures: Cross-sectional data on use and outcomes of health care from 1 July 2006 to 30 June 2012 are reported in accordance with national key performance indicators., Results: There were increases in occasions of service (from 21 218 to 33 753), most notably in primary health care services provided to very remote outlying communities (from 863 to 11 338). Health assessment uptake increased from 13% of the eligible population to 61%, leading to 73% of those identified with diabetes being placed on a care plan. Quality-of-care indicators (glycated haemoglobin checks and proportion of people with diabetics receiving antihypertensives) showed improvements over the 6-year study period, and there was also a downward trend in mortality., Conclusions: This study demonstrates that strengthening primary health care services by addressing key enablers and sustainability requirements can translate into population health gains consistent with the goals underpinning the National Health Care Reform and Closing the Gap policies, and may potentially reduce health inequity for remote-living Aboriginal Australians.

Objective: Access to primary healthcare (PHC) services is key to improving health outcomes in rural areas. Unfortunately, little is known about which aspect of access is most important. The objective of this study was to determine the relative importance of different dimensions of access in the decisions of rural Australians to utilise PHC provided by general practitioners (GP)., Methods: Data were collected from residents of five communities located in 'closely' settled and 'sparsely' settled rural regions. A paired-comparison methodology was used to quantify the relative importance of availability, distance, affordability (cost) and acceptability (preference) in relation to respondents' decisions to utilise a GP service for non-emergency care., Results: Consumers reported that preference for a GP and GP availability are far more important than distance to and cost of the service when deciding to visit a GP for non-emergency care. Important differences in rankings emerged by geographic context, gender and age., Conclusions: Understanding how different dimensions of access influence the utilisation of PHC services is critical in planning the provision of PHC services. This study reports how consumers 'trade-off' the different dimensions of access when accessing GP care in rural Australia. The results show that ensuring 'good' access requires that policymakers and planners should consider other dimensions of access to services besides geography.

The aim of this study was to describe the reorientation of a remote primary health-care service, in the Kimberley region of Australia, its impact on access to services and the factors instrumental in bringing about change. A unique community-initiated health service partnership was developed between a community-controlled Aboriginal health organisation, a government hospital and a population health unit, in order to overcome the challenges of delivering primary health care to a dispersed, highly disadvantaged Aboriginal population in a very remote area. The shared goals and clear delineation of responsibilities achieved through the partnership reoriented an essentially acute hospital-based service to a prevention-focussed comprehensive primary health-care service, with a focus on systematic screening for chronic disease, interdisciplinary follow up, health promotion, community advocacy and primary prevention. This formal partnership enabled the primary health-care service to meet the major challenges of providing a sustainable, prevention-focussed service in a very remote and socially disadvantaged area.

Background: Australians living in rural and remote areas experience poorer access to primary health care (PHC) and poorer health outcomes compared to metropolitan populations. Current health reform in Australia aims to ensure all Australians, regardless of where they live, have access to essential PHC services. However, at a national level policy makers and health planners lack an evidence-based set of core PHC services to assist in implementing this goal., Methods: A Delphi method was used to reach consensus on an evidence-based list of core PHC services to which all Australians should have access and their necessary support functions. Experts in rural and remote and/or Indigenous PHC, including policy-makers, academics, clinicians and consumers, were invited to consider a list of core services derived from the literature., Results: Thirty nine experts agreed to participate. After three survey rounds there was a strong consensus (≥80% agreement) on core PHC services namely; 'care of the sick and injured', 'mental health', 'maternal/child health', 'allied health', 'sexual/reproductive health', 'rehabilitation', 'oral/dental health' and 'public health/illness prevention'; and on the PHC support functions of; 'management/governance/leadership', 'coordination', 'health infrastructure', 'quality systems', 'data systems', 'professional development' and 'community participation'. Themes emerging from qualitative data included challenges in providing equitable PHC in rural and remote areas, the importance of service coordination and diverse strategies to overcome access barriers., Conclusion: This study identifies a basket of PHC services that consumers in rural and remote communities can expect to access. It provides rigorously derived evidence that will contribute to a more systematic approach to PHC service planning and availability and will assist policy makers in the allocation of scarce resources necessary to improve the health outcomes of residents of rural and remote areas.

Adequate health workforce alone will not ensure optimal health service access. We consider what an effective and sustainable health system for rural and remote Australia might look like in 2025, briefly describe some of the barriers to achieving this vision and propose how these challenges may be overcome. More radical change is required on at least four fronts: changing the prevailing ethos about rural and remote health; addressing persistent gaps in workforce education and training; delivery of comprehensive service models; and accountability.

Background: There are significant health status inequalities in Australia between those people living in rural and remote locations and people living in metropolitan centres. Since almost ninety percent of the population use some form of primary health care service annually, a logical initial step in reducing the disparity in health status is to improve access to health care by specifying those primary health care services that should be considered as "core" and therefore readily available to all Australians regardless of where they live. A systematic review was undertaken to define these "core" services.Using the question "What primary health care services should residents of rural and remote Australia be able to access?", the objective of this paper is to delineate those primary health care core services that should be readily available to all regardless of geography., Method: A systematic review of peer-reviewed literature from established databases was undertaken. Relevant websites were also searched for grey literature. Key informants were accessed to identify other relevant reference material. All papers were assessed by at least two assessors according to agreed inclusion criteria., Results: Data were extracted from 19 papers (7 papers from the peer-reviewed database search and 12 from other grey sources) which met the inclusion criteria. The 19 papers demonstrated substantial variability in both the number and nature of core services. Given this variation, the specification or synthesis of a universal set of core services proved to be a complex and arguably contentious task. Nonetheless, the different primary health care dimensions that should be met through the provision of core services were developed. In addition, the process of identifying core services provided important insights about the need to deliver these services in ways that are "fit-for-purpose" in widely differing geographic contexts., Conclusions: Defining a suite of core primary health care services is a difficult process. Such a suite should be fit-for-purpose, relevant to the context, and its development should be methodologically clear, appropriate, and evidence-based. The value of identifying core PHC services to both consumers and providers for service planning and monitoring and consequent health outcomes is paramount.

This paper provides a comprehensive review of the key dimensions of access and their significance for the provision of primary health care and a framework that assists policy-makers to evaluate how well policy targets the dimensions of access. Access to health care can be conceptualised as the potential ease with which consumers can obtain health care at times of need. Disaggregation of the concept of access into the dimensions of availability, geography, affordability, accommodation, timeliness, acceptability and awareness allows policy-makers to identify key questions which must be addressed to ensure reasonable primary health care access for rural and remote Australians. Evaluating how well national primary health care policies target these dimensions of access helps identify policy gaps and potential inequities in ensuring access to primary health care. Effective policies must incorporate the multiple dimensions of access if they are to comprehensively and effectively address unacceptable inequities in health status and access to basic health services experienced by rural and remote Australians., (© 2013 The Authors. Australian Journal of Rural Health © National Rural Health Alliance Inc.)

Objective: To demonstrate the usefulness of a conceptual framework to increase the understanding of rural and remote health by applying it to specific rural and remote health scenarios., Design: A conceptual framework was applied to two case studies illustrative of key issues in rural health to reflect different contexts, issues and responses., Results: Application of the framework to both case studies highlighted that changes in rural and remote health are diverse. While power was a key element of the framework, the interaction of all framework components underpinned changes., Conclusion: The framework facilitated understanding of change in these rural scenarios and demonstrated that improvement in rural health requires change at both the local and structural levels., (© 2012 The Authors. Australian Journal of Rural Health © National Rural Health Alliance Inc.)

Objective: Rural and remote health research has highlighted the many problems experienced in the bush. While attention to problems has raised awareness of the needs of rural and remote health, embedding a deficit perspective in research has stereotyped rural and remote health as poor environments to work in and as inherently problematic. The objectives of this paper are to challenge this thinking and suggest that a more balanced approach, acknowledging strengths, is beneficial., Design: This discussion identifies why the deficit approach is problematic, proposes a strengths-based approach and identifies some key strengths of rural and remote health., Results: This study suggests alternative ways of thinking about rural and remote practice, including the rewards of rural and remote practice, that rural and remote communities can act as change agents, that these disciplines actively address the social determinants of health, that rural and remote areas have many innovative primary health care services and activities and that rural and remote contexts provide opportunities for evaluation and research. It is proposed that rural and remote health can be viewed as problem-solving, thus dynamic and improving rather than as inherently problematic., Conclusion: Critical of a deficit approach to rural and remote health, this paper provides alternatives ways of thinking about these disciplines and recommends a problem-solving perspective of rural and remote health., (© 2010 The Authors. Australian Journal of Rural Health © National Rural Health Alliance Inc.)

Objective: To develop a conceptual framework for monitoring the relationship between health services and health outcomes in rural Australia., Design and Setting: Development of an evaluation framework for a rural comprehensive primary health service in Victoria., Results: Evidence regarding essential components for successful primary health care, and objective health service and health status measures were combined to develop a conceptual health service evaluation framework. Application of the framework is illustrated using a case study of a rural primary health service in Victoria., Conclusions: Inadequate health services limit access to health care, delay use at times of need and result in poor health outcomes. Currently, there is a lack of evidence from rigorous health service evaluations to indicate which rural health services work well, where and why that could inform rural health policies and funding. Although the nature of health service models will vary across communities in order to meet their differing geographic circumstances, there is considerable scope for the translation and generalisation of evidence gained from health service models that are shown to be sustainable, responsive and able to deliver local quality health care. This framework can guide future health service evaluation research and thereby provide a better understanding of a health service's impact on the health of the community and its residents.

Objective: To outline a new index of access to primary care services in rural areas that has been specifically designed to overcome weaknesses of using existing geographical classifications., Methods: Access was measured by four key dimensions of availability, proximity, health needs and mobility. Population data were obtained through the national census and primary care service data were obtained through the Medical Directory of Australia. All data were calculated at the smallest feasible geographical unit (collection districts). The index of access was measured using a modified two-step floating catchment area (2SFCA) method, which incorporates two necessary additional spatial functions (distance-decay and capping) and two additional non-spatial dimensions (health needs and mobility)., Results: An improved index of access, specifically designed to better capture access to primary care in rural areas, is achieved. These improvements come from: 1) incorporation of actual health service data in the index; 2) methodological improvements to existing access measures, which enable both proximity to be differentiated within catchments and the use of varying catchment sizes; and 3) improved sensitivity to small-area variations., Conclusion: Despite their recognised weaknesses, the Australian government uses broad geographical classifications as proxy measures of access to underpin significant rural health funding programs. This new index of access could provide a more equitable means for resource allocation., Implications: Significant government funding, aimed at improving health service access inequities in rural areas, could be better targeted by underpinning programs with our improved access measure.

Background: The problem of access to health care is of growing concern for rural and remote populations. Many Australian rural health funding programs currently use simplistic rurality or remoteness classifications as proxy measures of access. This paper outlines the development of an alternative method for the measurement of access to primary care, based on combining the three key access elements of spatial accessibility (availability and proximity), population health needs and mobility., Methods: The recently developed two-step floating catchment area (2SFCA) method provides a basis for measuring primary care access in rural populations. In this paper, a number of improvements are added to the 2SFCA method in order to overcome limitations associated with its current restriction to a single catchment size and the omission of any distance decay function. Additionally, small-area measures for the two additional elements, health needs and mobility are developed. By utilising this improved 2SFCA method, the three access elements are integrated into a single measure of access. This index has been developed within the state of Victoria, Australia., Results: The resultant index, the Index of Rural Access, provides a more sensitive and appropriate measure of access compared to existing classifications which currently underpin policy measures designed to overcome problems of limited access to health services. The most powerful aspect of this new index is its ability to identify access differences within rural populations at a much finer geographical scale. This index highlights that many rural areas of Victoria have been incorrectly classified by existing measures as homogenous in regards to their access., Conclusion: The Index of Rural Access provides the first truly integrated index of access to primary care. This new index can be used to better target the distribution of limited government health care funding allocated to address problems of poor access to primary health care services in rural areas.

Objective: To provide an overview of papers discussing optimal service delivery models for rural and remote Australia., Design: A synthesis of overarching considerations guiding rural and remote health service policies., Setting: Small rural and remote communities in Australia., Participants: Invited delegates attending the Inaugural Rural and Remote Health Scientific Symposium in Brisbane 2008., Main Outcome Measures: Key issues underpinning health service provision for small rural and remote communities., Results: The formulation and implementation of effective health service provision policies must be underpinned by overarching health goals, agreed health service requirements, recognition of how rural and remote health contexts impact upon health service provision and the constraints limiting health service responses., Conclusion: Systemic change is required in order to ensure equitable access to health care services in small rural and remote communities.

Objective: To validate earlier findings that lack of access to health services is the most likely issue of complaint by rural consumers, and that lack of knowledge about how to make effective complaints and scepticism that responses to complaints bring about service improvement account for the under-representation of complaints from rural consumers., Design: Unaddressed reply-paid mail survey to 100% of households in small communities, and 50%, 20% or 10% in progressively larger communities., Setting: Eight communities in the Loddon-Mallee region of Victoria., Participants: 983 householders most responsible for the health care of household members, responding to a mailed questionnaire., Main Outcome Measures: Issues of complaints actually made; issues of unsatisfactory situations when a complaint was not made; reasons for not complaining; to whom complaints are made; and plans for dealing with any future complaint., Results: Earlier findings were confirmed. Lack of access to health services was the most important issue, indicated by 54.8% of those who had made a complaint, and 72% of those who wanted to but did not. The most common reason given for not complaining was that it was futile to do so. Lack of knowledge of how to make effective complaints which might contribute to the quality assurance cycle was evident., Conclusions: Rural consumers' disaffection with health complaints as a means to quality improvement poses a significant barrier to consumer engagement in quality assurance processes. Provider practices may need to change to regain community confidence in quality improvement processes.

Objective: To identify which explanations account for lower rural rates of complaint about health services--(i) fear of consequences where there is little choice of alternative provider; (ii) a higher complaint threshold for rural consumers; (iii) lack of access to complaint mechanisms; or (iv) reduced access to services about which to complain., Design: Ecological study incorporating consumer complaint, population and workforce distribution data sources., Setting: All health care providers practising in Victoria., Participants: De-identified records of all closed consumer complaints made to the Health Services Commissioner, Victoria, between March 1988 and April 2001 by Victorian residents (13 856 records)., Main Outcome Measures: Differences in the percentage of under-representation in complaint rates in total and for each of four categories of health services providers for different size communities., Results: No consistent relationship was observed between community size and either degree of under-representation of complaints against any category of provider, or the proportion of serious or substantial complaints. Rural under-representation was highest (41%) for dentists, the provider category with the lowest proportion working in rural areas (17%), and lowest (18%) for hospitals, with the highest representation in rural areas (28% of beds). More rural complaints were about access issues (10.7% rural and 8.4% metropolitan)., Conclusions: Reduced opportunity to use health services due to rural health and medical workforce shortages was the best-supported explanation for the lower rural complaint rate. Workforce shortages impact on the quality of rural health services and on residents' opportunities to improve their health status.

Objective: The absence of an agreed definition of "rural" limits the utility of existing research into a possible relationship between rurality of residence and mental health. The present study investigates the bipolar dimension accessibility/remoteness as a possible correlate of mental health., Method: A continuous area of non-metropolitan Australia was selected to provide a range of scores on the Accessibility/Remoteness Index of Australia (ARIA). A questionnaire measuring demographics, the five-factor model of personality and three aspects of mental health (distress, disability and wellbeing) was mailed to 20 000 adults selected randomly from electoral rolls., Results: Responses were received from 7615 individuals (response rate = 40.5%; 57.1% female). ARIA was not associated with either distress or disability measures, but a small negative association was found between accessibility and two measures of wellbeing. Individuals residing in locales with better access to services and opportunities for interaction reported higher levels of satisfaction with life (SWL) and positive affect (PA). Adjusting statistically for a range of demographic and personality correlates did not alter the effect of ARIA on SWL. The effect on PA remained significant after adjusting for demographics, but not once personality correlates entered the model., Conclusions: By sampling across a single proposed parameter of rurality, a novel profile of correlations was identified. In accord with existing data, accessibility was not associated with distress or disability. In contrast, accessibility was positively associated with the wellbeing aspect of mental health. Further attention to the measurement of rural place and the exploration of accessibility as a parameter with mental health relevance, is warranted.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic period (2020 to 2022) challenged and overstretched the capacity of primary health care services to deliver health care globally. The sector faced a highly uncertain and dynamic period that encompassed anticipation of a new, unknown, lethal and highly transmissible infection, the introduction of various travel restrictions, health workforce shortages, new government funding announcements and various policies to restrict the spread of the COVID-19 virus, then vaccination and treatments. This qualitative study aims to document and explore how the pandemic affected primary health care utilisation and delivery in remote and regional Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with staff working in 11 Aboriginal Community-Controlled Health Services (ACCHSs) in outer regional, remote and very remote Australia. Interviews were transcribed, inductively coded and thematically analysed. Results: 248 staff working in outer regional, remote and very remote primary health care clinics were interviewed between February 2020 and June 2021. Participants reported a decline in numbers of primary health care presentations in most communities during the initial COVID-19 lock down period. The reasons for the decline were attributed to community members apprehension to go to the clinics, change in work priorities of primary health care staff (e.g. more emphasis on preventing the virus entering the communities and stopping the spread) and limited outreach programs. Staff forecasted a future spike in acute presentations of various chronic diseases leading to increased medical retrieval requirements from remote communities to hospital. Information dissemination during the pre-vaccine roll-out stage was perceived to be well received by community members, while vaccine roll-out stage information was challenged by misinformation circulated through social media. Conclusions: The ability of ACCHSs to be able to adapt service delivery in response to the changing COVID-19 strategies and policies are highlighted in this study. The study signifies the need to adequately fund ACCHSs with staff, resources, space and appropriate information to enable them to connect with their communities and continue their work especially in an era where the additional challenges created by pandemics are likely to become more frequent. While the PHC seeking behaviour of community members during the COVID-19 period were aligned to the trends observed across the world, some of the reasons underlying the trends were unique to outer regional, remote and very remote populations. Policy makers will need to give due consideration to the potential effects of newly developed policies on ACCHSs operating in remote and regional contexts that already battle under resourcing issues and high numbers of chronically ill populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thirty years ago the first edition of the Australian Journal of Rural Health (AJRH) was published. Following reviews published in 2002 and 2012, it is again time to review what progress has been made in bringing about improved health outcomes for residents of rural and remote Australia over the past decade. Compounded by the Covid‐19 crisis that has affected the health and health care system throughout Australia, this review notes the significant lack of progress over the past decade in ameliorating ongoing problems of poor access to primary health care and associated avoidable hospitalisations, persistent poor health of Indigenous Australians, and the greater prevalence of a range of health risk factors. Following the findings of the recent New South Wales enquiry into rural health, this review highlights what is needed to implement the many recommendations that have emerged from the wealth of evidence‐based research published in journals such as the AJRH to improve health outcomes and increase the parity and equity in health between metropolitan and non‐metropolitan Australians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Visiting health services are a feature of health care delivery in rural and remote contexts. These services are often described as ‘fly‐in fly‐out’ or ‘drive‐in drive‐out’. Posing the question ‘What are the different types of visiting models of primary health care being used in rural and remote communities?’, the objective of this article was to describe a typology of models of health services that visit remote communities. A systematic review of peer‐reviewed literature from established databases was undertaken. Data were extracted from 20 papers (16 peer‐reviewed papers and four from other sources), which met the inclusion criteria. From the available evidence, it was difficult to develop a typology of services. The central feature of service providers visiting rural and remote districts on a regular basis was consistent, although the service provider's geographical base varied and the extent to which the same service provider should be providing the service was not consistently endorsed. While a clear typology did not emerge from the systematic review, it became apparent that a set of guiding principles might be more helpful to service providers and planners. Focusing policy and decision‐making on important principles of visiting services, rather than their typological features, is likely to be of ultimately more benefit to the health outcomes of people who live in rural and remote communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There are limited respite services for palliative care patients and their families in the Northern Territory (NT). The high prevalence of complex chronic diseases, limited access to primary care services, and the poor living situations of many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians result in high hospitalisation rates and pressure on tertiary health services. Palliative Care NT identified a need for a flexible, community based, culturally appropriate respite service in Alice Springs. It was of particular interest to assess the impact of the respite service on the extent to which hospital resources were accessed by this population of patients. Methods: Respite service use and hospital use data were collected over two time periods: the 12 months prior to the establishment of the service; and the first 10 months of the operation of the service. The financial implications of the facility were assessed in terms of the National Weighted Activity Unit (NWAU). Of primary interest in this study was the impact of the respite service on admissions to the Emergency Department (ED), to the Wards, and to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). The amount of ventilator hours consumed was also of interest. Results: Overall, there was a mean cost saving of $1882.50 per episode for hospital admissions with a reduction in: hospital admissions; mean length of stay; Intensive Care Unit (ICU) hours; and ventilator hours. Conclusions: The establishment of the respite service has met an important and unmet need in Alice Springs: provision of respite where none has existed before. The service did assist with savings to the health department which could contribute to the cost of the facility over time. Two features of the respite facility that may have contributed to the savings generated were the enhanced coordination of care for patients with complex chronic diseases, as well as improved medication compliance and symptom management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Improved Primary Health Care (PHC) utilisation is central to reducing the unacceptable morbidity and mortality rates characterising populations living in remote communities. Despite poorer health, significant inequity characterises the funding of PHC services in Australia's most remote areas. This pilot study sought to ascertain what funding is required to ensure equitable access to sustainable, high quality primary health care irrespective of geographical remoteness of communities. Methods: High performing remote Primary Health Care (PHC) services were selected using improvement measures from the Australian Primary Care Collaboratives Program and validated by health experts. Eleven PHC services provided data relating to the types of services provided, level of service utilisation, human resources, operating and capital expenses. A further four services that provide visiting PHC to remote communities provided information on the level and cost of these services. Demographic data for service catchment areas (including estimated resident population, age, Indigenous status, English spoken at home and workforce participation) were obtained from the Australian Bureau of Statistics 2011 census. Formal statistical inference (p-values) were derived in the linear regression via the nonparametric bootstrap. Results: A direct linear relationship was observed between the total cost of resident PHC services and population, while cost per capita decreased with increasing population. Services in smaller communities had a higher number of nursing staff per 1000 residents and provided more consultations per capita than those in larger communities. The number of days of visiting services received by a community each year also increased with population. A linear regression with bootstrapped statistical inference predicted a significant regression equation where the cost of resident services per annum is equal to $1,251,893.92 + ($1698.83 x population) and the cost of resident and visiting services is equal to $1,378,870.85 + ($2600.00 x population). Conclusions: The research findings provide empirical evidence based on real costs to guide funding for remote PHC services that takes into account the safety and equity requirements for a minimum viable service. This method can be used as a transparent, coordinated approach to ensure the equitable delivery of sustainable, high quality PHC in remote communities. This will in turn contribute to improved health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Australian Journal of Rural Health is currently celebrating its 20th anniversary. Following a review of the first decade of rural health published by the authors in 2002, this article outlines and reviews the range of policies that have impacted upon rural health in Australia since then. During the past decade there has been a raft of new policies and programs designed to bring about improved rural health outcomes, and some progress has been made. However, a number of significant barriers to overcoming the rural-urban health differential remain. Special consideration will continue to be needed to rural affairs generally and to health system reform and rural health in particular. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The objective of this study is to develop a framework to measure the impact of primary health care research, describe how it could be used and propose a method for its validation. Design: Literature review and critical appraisal of existing models of research impact, and integration of three into a comprehensive impact framework. Setting: Centre of Research Excellence focusing on access to primary health care services in Australia. Participants: Not applicable. Interventions: Not applicable. Main outcome measure: The Health Services Research Impact Framework, integrating the strengths of three existing models of research impact. Conclusion: In order to ensure relevance to policy and practice and to provide accountability for funding, it is essential that the impact of health services research is measured and monitored over time. Our framework draws upon previously published literature regarding specific measures of research impact. We organise this information according to the main area of impact (i.e. research related, policy, service and societal) and whether the impact originated with the researcher (i.e. producer push) or the end-user (i.e. user pull). We propose to test the utility of the framework by recording and monitoring the impact of our own research and that of other groups of primary health care researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To highlight how evidence from studies of innovative rural and remote models of service provision can inform global health system reform in order to develop appropriate, accessible and sustainable primary health care (PHC) services to 'difficult-to-service' communities. The paper synthesises evidence from remote and rural PHC health service innovations in Australia. There is a strong history of PHC innovation in Australia. Successful health service models are 'contextualised' to address diverse conditions. They also require systemic solutions, which address a range of interlinked factors such as governance, leadership and management, adequate funding, infrastructure, service linkages and workforce. An effective systemic approach relies on alignment of changes at the health service level with those in the external policy environment. Ideally, every level of government or health authority needs to agree on policy and funding arrangements for optimal service development. A systematic approach in addressing these health system requirements is also important. Service providers, funders and consumers need to know what type and level of services they can reasonably expect in different community contexts, but there are gaps in agreed indicators and benchmarks for PHC services. In order to be able to comprehensively monitor and evaluate services, as well as benchmarks, we need adequate national information systems. Despite the gaps in our knowledge, we do have a significant amount of information about what works, where and why. At a time of global PHC reform, applying this knowledge will contribute significantly to the development of appropriate, sustainable PHC services and improving access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Visiting services address the problem of workforce deficit and access to effective primary health care services in isolated remote and rural locations. Little is known about their impact or effectiveness and thereby the extent to which they are helping to reduce the disparity in access and health outcomes between people living in remote areas compared with people living in urban regions of Australia. The objective of this study was to answer the question "What is the impact or effectiveness when different types of primary health care services visit, rather than reside in, rural and remote communities?"Method: We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature from established databases. We also searched relevant websites for 'grey' literature and contacted several key informants to identify other relevant reference material. All papers were reviewed by at least two assessors according to agreed inclusion and exclusion criteria.Results: Initially, 345 papers were identified and, from this selection, 17 papers were considered relevant for inclusion. Following full paper review, another ten papers were excluded leaving seven papers that provided some information about the impact or effectiveness of visiting services. The papers varied with regard to study design (ranging from cluster randomised controlled trials to a case study), research quality, and the strength of their conclusions. In relation to effectiveness or impact, results were mixed. There was a lack of consistent data regarding the features or characteristics of visiting services that enhance their effectiveness or impact. Almost invariably the evaluations assessed the service provided but only two papers mentioned any aspect of the visiting features within which service provision occurred such as who did the visiting and how often they visited.Conclusions: There is currently an inadequate evidence base from which to make decisions about the effectiveness of visiting services or how visiting services should be structured in order to achieve better health outcomes for people living in remote and rural areas. Given this knowledge gap, we suggest that more rigorous evaluation of visiting services in meeting community health needs is required, and that evaluation should be guided by a number of salient principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]