Search

Background: Māori are over-represented in Aotearoa New Zealand morbidity and mortality statistics. Other populations with high health needs include Pacific peoples and those living with material deprivation. General practice has evolved into seven models of primary care: Traditional, Corporate, Health Care Home, Māori, Pacific, Trusts / Non-governmental organisations (Trust/NGOs) and District Health Board / Primary Care Organisations (DHB/PHO). We describe nurse work in relation to these models of care, populations with high health need and patient health outcomes. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study (at 30 September 2018) of data from national datasets and practices at patient level. Six primary outcome measures were selected because they could be improved by primary care: polypharmacy (≥ 65 years), glucose control testing in adults with diabetes, immunisations (at 6 months), ambulatory sensitive hospitalisations (0–14, 45–64 years) and emergency department attendances. Analysis adjusted for patient and practice characteristics. Results: Nurse clinical time, and combined nurse, nurse practitioner and general practitioner clinical time, were substantially higher in Trust/NGO, Māori, and Pacific practices than in other models. Increased patient clinical complexity was associated with more clinical input and higher scores on all outcome measures. The highest rates of preventative care by nurses (cervical screening, cardiovascular risk assessment, depression screening, glucose control testing) were in Māori, Trust/NGO and Pacific practices. There was an eightfold difference, across models of care, in percentage of depression screening undertaken by nurses and a fivefold difference in cervical screening and glucose control testing. The highest rates of nurse consultations afterhours and with unenrolled patients, improving access, were in PHO/DHB, Pacific, Trust/NGO and Māori practices. Work not attributed to nurses in the practice records meant nurse work was underestimated to an unknown degree. Conclusions: Transferring work to nurses in Traditional, Health Care Home, and Corporate practices, would release general practitioner clinical time for other work. Worse patient health outcomes were associated with higher patient need and higher clinical input. It is plausible that there is insufficient clinical input to meet the degree of patient need. More practitioner clinical time is required, especially in practices with high volumes of complex patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction. Few mandatory community-based attachments for postgraduate year two doctors (PGY2s) in Aotearoa New Zealand are hosted in general practices, due to space, time and remuneration barriers. Aim. This study aimed to explore the costs, barriers and enablers to general practices of hosting PGY2s. Methods. A cost analysis for four general practices beginning to host PGY2s was undertaken, including time spent supervising and supporting PGY2s, revenue impact including subsidies and cost of providing clinical space. Interviews with these practices and seven experienced PGY2 host practices were conducted and analysed thematically. Results. The estimated mean cost of hosting PGY2s excluding room cost was NZ$4907 per 13-week placement (range $890-$9183), increasing to $13 727 per placement (range $5750-$24 715) when room rental was included. Four themes were identified: working within a small business model; a new learning environment for PGY2s; providing positive experiences for the PGY2s; the relationship between practices and district hospitals that employed the PGY2s, including job sizing. Discussion. Tension exists between the small business model of general practice and providing positive experiences for PGY2s in a new learning environment. Guidance and support structures for PGY2 hosting should be developed nationally, and communication and cooperation between practices and employing hospitals needs improvement. Out-of-hours work should be included in community-based attachments so PGY2s' remuneration is consistent. General practice teams are willing to be part of creating a sustainable workforce. However, the time taken to host and costs of providing training in primary care are barriers. There is urgent need to increase funding to general practices for hosting PGY2s. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: For more than a century, Māori have experienced poorer health than non-Māori. In 2019 an independent Tribunal found the Government had breached Te Tiriti o Waitangi by "failing to design and administer the current primary health care system to actively address persistent Māori health inequities". Many Māori (44%) have unmet needs for primary care. Seven models of primary care were identified by the funders and the research team, including Māori-owned practices. We hypothesised patient health outcomes for Māori would differ between models of care. Methods: Cross-sectional primary care data were analysed at 30 September 2018. National datasets were linked to general practices at patient level, to measure associations between practice characteristics and patient health outcomes. Primary outcomes: polypharmacy (≥ 55 years), HbA1c testing, child immunisations, ambulatory sensitive hospitalisations (0–14, 45–64 years) and emergency department attendances. Regressions include only Māori patients, across all models of care. Results: A total of 660,752 Māori patients were enrolled in 924 practices with 124,854 in 65 Māori-owned practices. Māori practices had: no significant association with HbA1c testing, ambulatory sensitive hospitalisations or ED attendances, and a significant association with lower polypharmacy (3.7% points) and lower childhood immunisations (13.4% points). Māori practices had higher rates of cervical smear and cardiovascular risk assessment, lower rates of HbA1c tests, and more nurse (46%) and doctor (8%) time (FTE) with patients. The average Māori practice had 52% Māori patients compared to 12% across all practices. Māori practices enrolled a higher percentage of children and young people, five times more patients in high deprivation areas, and patients with more multimorbidity. More Māori patients lived rurally (21.5% vs 15%), with a greater distance to the nearest ED. Māori patients were more likely to be dispensed antibiotics or tramadol. Conclusions: Māori practices are an expression of autonomy in the face of enduring health system failure. Apart from lower immunisation rates, health outcomes were not different from other models of care, despite patients having higher health risk profiles. Across all models, primary care need was unmet for many Māori, despite increased clinical input. Funding must support under-resourced Māori practices and ensure accountability for the health outcomes of Māori patients in all models of general practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary care in Aotearoa New Zealand is largely delivered by general practices, heavily subsidised by government. Te Tiriti o Waitangi (1840) guarantees equal health outcomes for Māori and non-Māori, but differences are stark and longstanding. Seven models of primary care have evolved. We hypothesised that patient health outcomes would differ between models of care; and that Māori, Pacific peoples and those living in material deprivation would have poorer outcomes from primary care. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of patient-level data from national datasets and practices, at 30 September 2018, using multilevel mixed effects regression analyses (patients clustered within practices). Primary outcomes, considered to be measures of unmet need for primary care, were polypharmacy (≥ 65 years), HbA1c testing in adults with diabetes, childhood immunisations (6 months), ambulatory sensitive hospitalisations (0–14, 45–64 years) and emergency department attendances. Explanatory variables adjusted for patient and practice characteristics. Equity, by model of care, ethnicity and deprivation, was assumed if they showed no significant association with patient outcomes. Patient characteristics included: age, ethnicity, deprivation, multi-morbidity, first specialist assessments and practice continuity. Practice characteristics included: size, funding and doctor continuity. Clinical input (consultations and time with nurses and doctors) was considered a measure of practice response. Results: The study included 924 general practices with 4,491,964 enrolled patients. Traditional practices enrolled 73% of the population, but, on average, the proportion of Māori, Pacific and people living with material deprivation was low in any one Traditional practice. Patients with high health needs disproportionately enrolled in Māori, Pacific and Trust/NGO practices. There were multiple associations between models of care and patient health outcomes in fully adjusted regressions. No one model of care out-performed others across all outcomes. Patients with higher health need received more clinical input but this was insufficient to achieve equity in all outcomes. Being a Māori or Pacific patient, or living in material deprivation, across models of care, remained associated with poorer outcomes. Conclusions: Model-level associations with poor patient outcomes suggest inequity in measures that might be used to target investment in primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses topics within the issue on hybridisation tension, that is, the tension between operating a sustainable business and providing health care, its effect on primary health care and the strategies that can help address these issues.

Introduction: Providing sustainable high quality healthcare to rural communities is challenging, due to health workforce shortages, and the complexities of providing health care over distance. What do people who live in rural New Zealand communities think contributes to health care quality when they require hospital level care? What do those who plan and provide their health care think? What do they see as the right balance between local and regional provision of hospital services? Theory/methods: Individual semi-structured interviews and focus groups were undertaken in four rural communities in New Zealand. Enquiry focused on factors that influenced quality when rural people needed hospital care, and how networks and technology could improve care. The views of rural health planners and providers, local Māori and community groups were analysed for common and divergent themes. Results: Members of the community placed importance on communication, respect for people's values, access to services, and transport when services were not available locally. Health planners and providers placed importance on recognising the value in the difference of what smaller hospitals provide and developing health service networks across smaller and larger hospitals. The right workforce and technology to support pathways of care and communication were also important. Discussion: People living in rural communities had similar views on what contributed to high quality hospital care but with different foci compared to health care planners and providers. If we are to provide patient-centred care to rural communities, the views of rural people need to be central to service design. Getting the medical generalist and specialist workforces working together in a 'one service, different sites' approach is also key. This research will assist health care planners and providers, and rural communities to identify actions that can be taken to improve the quality of hospital care received by rural communities. Conclusions: Maximising health care quality for rural communities requires patient centred service design with the local and regional health care providers working together as a team and using technology appropriately to provide patient-centred high quality care. Lessons learned: Good communication and relationships supported by good processes underpin good quality care Limitations: The views of people spoken to in the four communities may not be representative of New Zealand rural communities in general, although the communities were spread geographically, by socioeconomic status and by ethnic composition. Suggestions for future research: Further exploration of the networks and enablers across the New Zealand health system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]