Search

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]

Issue Addressed: Community participation in planning, delivery, and evaluation of health promotion (HP) programs is a poorly explored topic. However, this approach has the potential to improve health outcomes and reduce health inequities, particularly for residents of rural and remote areas., Methods: This case study describes the outputs of an academic-health service partnership in rural Victoria. The collaboration has led to the implementation and ongoing evaluation of a microgrant program for HP which integrates community participation principles in the foundations of the program and its evaluation., Results: To date, 10 funded projects have been brought to completion, with COVID-19 having disturbed both grant distribution and funded activity implementation. Semi-structured interviews with health service officers served to clarify conceptualisation and operationalization of HP principles. Focus groups with health service management and officers contributed to building an overarching evaluation framework for the HP team's activities. Finally, the specific methodological evaluation framework for the microgrant program was developed through a collaborative workshop with the HP team and grantees., Conclusions: Fostering community participation in HP planning, delivery, and evaluation, especially in rural areas, is feasible as evidenced by the experience described in this case study. The forthcoming evaluation results will help clarify the impact of community participation on health-related outcomes. SO WHAT?: Documentation and dissemination of processes used to increase community participation in HP programs is essential to grow the knowledge base around what works and what doesn't, and for whom., (© 2023 The Authors. Health Promotion Journal of Australia published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Health Promotion Association.)