Search

Introduction: Mainstream Australian mental health services are failing Aboriginal young people. Despite investing resources, improvements in well-being have not materialised. Culturally and age appropriate ways of working are needed to improve service access and responsiveness. This Aboriginal-led study brings Aboriginal Elders, young people and youth mental health service staff together to build relationships to co-design service models and evaluation tools. Currently, three Western Australian youth mental health services in the Perth metropolitan area and two regional services are working with local Elders and young people to improve their capacity for culturally and age appropriate services. Further Western Australian sites will be engaged as part of research translation., Methods and Analysis: Relationships ground the study, which utilises Indigenous methodologies and participatory action research. This involves Elders, young people and service staff as co-researchers and the application of a decolonising, strengths-based framework to create the conditions for engagement. It foregrounds experiential learning and Aboriginal ways of working to establish relationships and deepen non-Aboriginal co-researchers' knowledge and understanding of local, place-based cultural practices. Once relationships are developed, co-design workshops occur at each site directed by local Elders and young people. Co-designed evaluation tools will assess any changes to community perceptions of youth mental health services and the enablers and barriers to service engagement., Ethics and Dissemination: The study has approval from the Kimberley Aboriginal Health Planning Forum Kimberley Research Subcommittee, the Western Australian Aboriginal Health Ethics Committee, and the Curtin University Human Research Ethics Committee. Transferability of the outcomes across the youth mental health sector will be directed by the co-researchers and is supported through Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal organisations including youth mental health services, peak mental health bodies and consumer groups. Community reports and events, peer-reviewed journal articles, conference presentations and social and mainstream media will aid dissemination., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The majority of studies exploring the impact of interprofessional education (IPE) for pre-licensure health professionals have focused on IPE experiences in the classroom, online or through simulation. Research into IPE in clinical settings has been carried out, however, to date most studies have focused on short-term outcomes related to learner reaction, attitudes and perceptions, and knowledge and skills. This study adds to the literature investigating IPE in clinical settings for pre-licensure health professionals by investigating the experiences of learners who, following their IPE clinical placement, had moved into other clinical (workplace) environments. To understand what, if any, influence the clinical IPE experience had on their subsequent professional practice, 13 participants (students and graduates) from five professions were interviewed. Inductive thematic analysis identified that, following their IPE placement, participants engaged in interprofessional practice by seeking and sharing information, embedding other professional goals into patient sessions and conducting joint sessions. Several factors influenced the ability and capacity to collaborate at the individual and organisation level. Findings from this study suggest that the dedicated IPE placements enhanced both student and graduate openness and ability to collaborate with other professions in subsequent clinical workplace settings.

Interprofessional education in practice settings typically requires greater resource investment than in the classroom or online. Increased interest in return on investment means research on the outcomes of practice-based interprofessional education is needed. In this article, we report findings from a qualitative study involving a series of focus groups with health sciences' students during their interprofessional placements in three community health settings in Western Australia. An exploratory case study approach was adopted to determine students' perceptions of the placement and their learning. The presage-process-product (3P) model of learning and teaching was employed to illuminate to the nature of this interprofessional education experience. Verbatim transcripts were analysed by two researchers using an inductive approach to derive key themes. Findings illuminate a number of factors that strongly influenced student perceptions of their learning in interprofessional practice-based placements including a dedicated space to collaborate and learn; exposure to a wide range of professions in practice settings; the approach of the facilitators; and students' previous clinical experience, year level and the timing of the placement. Students reported that the placement enhanced their knowledge, professional communication, leadership, understanding of other health professions and collaboration. This study provides contemporary insight into key factors that influence student learning during practice-based interprofessional placements.

This scoping study examined how "leadership" is referred to and used in interprofessional education and practice. A total of 114 refereed articles were reviewed to determine how leadership is defined, conceptualised, and theorised. The review also examined what capabilities were identified for effective interprofessional leadership. The majority of papers were empirical studies undertaken by researchers based in North America. The majority of articles did not refer to a specific leadership approach, nor did they define, describe, or theorise leadership. Moreover, "leadership" capabilities were rarely identified. Articles generally focused on health practitioners and educators or students as leaders with little exploration of leadership at higher levels (e.g. executive, accrediting bodies, government). This review indicates the need for a more critical examination of interprofessional leadership and the capabilities required to lead the changes required in both education and practice settings. The goal of this article is to stimulate discussion and more sophisticated, shared understandings of interprofessional leadership for the professions. Recommendations for future research are required in both education and practice settings.

Objective: To compare two methods of risk stratification for suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in the ED., Methods: A prospective observational multicentre study was undertaken of patients undergoing evaluation in the ED for possible ACS. We compared the National Heart Foundation of Australia/Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand (NHF/CSANZ) guideline and the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) risk score for differentiating high- and low-risk patients. Composite outcome was all cause death, myocardial infarction or coronary revascularisation within 30 days., Results: Of 1758 enrolments, 223 (13%) reached the study outcome. Area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.79 (95% CI 0.76-0.81) for the NHF/CSANZ group and 0.71 (0.68-0.75) for TIMI score based on initial troponin result (P<0.001), and 0.82 (95% CI 0.80-0.84) and 0.76 (0.73-0.79) respectively when the 8-12 h troponin result is included (P=0.001). Thirty day event rates were 33% for NHF/CSANZ high-risk vs 1.5% for combined low/intermediate risk (P<0.001). For TIMI score, 30 day event rates were 23% for a score ≥2 and 4.8% for TIMI<2 (P<0.001). The NHF/CSANZ guideline identified more patients as low risk compared with the TIMI risk score (61% vs 48%, P<0.001)., Conclusions: The NHF/CSANZ guideline is superior to the TIMI risk score for risk stratification of suspected ACS in the ED., (© 2011 The Authors. EMA © 2011 Australasian College for Emergency Medicine and Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine.)