Australian health review : a publication of the Australian Hospital Association
-
There is a paucity of research on the quality of evidence relating to primary care workforce models. Thus, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the quality of evidence on diabetes primary care workforce models in Australia. ⋯ More rigorous studies of diabetes workforce models are needed to determine whether these interventions improve patient outcomes and, if they do, represent value for money. WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THE TOPIC?: Although health systems with strong primary care orientations have been associated with enhanced access, equity and population health, the primary care workforce is facing several challenges. These include a mal-distribution of resources (supply side) and health outcomes (demand side), inconsistent support for teamwork care models, and a lack of enhanced clinical inter-professional education and/or training opportunities. These challenges are exacerbated by an ageing health workforce and general population, as well as a population that has increased prevalence of chronic conditions and multi-morbidity. Although several policy directions have been advocated to address these challenges, there is a lack of high-quality evidence about which primary care workforce models are best (and which models represent better value for money than current practice) and what the health effects are for patients. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER ADD?: This study demonstrated several strengths and weaknesses of Australian diabetes models of care studies. In particular, only five of the 14 studies assessed were designed in a way that enabled them to achieve a Level II or I rating (and hence the 'best' level of evidence), based on the NHMRC's (2000, 2001) frameworks for assessing scientific evidence. The majority of studies risked the introduction of bias and thus may have incorrect conclusions. Only a few studies described clearly what the intervention and the comparator were and thus could be easily replicated. Only two studies included cost-effectiveness studies of their interventions compared with usual care. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS?: Although there has been an increase in the number of primary care workforce models implemented in Australia, there is a need for more rigorous research to assess whether these interventions are effective in producing improved health outcomes and represent better value for money than current practice. Researchers and policymakers need to make decisions based on high-quality evidence; it is not obvious what effect the evidence is having on primary care workforce reform.
-
In 2011, the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC) recommended that all hospitals in Australia must have an Antimicrobial Stewardship (AMS) program by 2013. Nevertheless, little is known about current AMS activities. This study aimed to determine the AMS activities currently undertaken, and to identify gaps, barriers to implementation and opportunities for improvement in Queensland hospitals. ⋯ Several areas for improvement were identified: reviewing antimicrobial prescribing with feedback to the prescriber, auditing, and training and education in antimicrobial use. There also appears to be a lack of resources to support AMS programs in some facilities. WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THE TOPIC?: The ACSQHC has recommended that all hospitals implement an AMS program by 2013 as a requirement of Standard 3 (Preventing and Controlling Healthcare-Associated Infections) of the National Safety and Quality Health Service Standards. The intent of AMS is to ensure appropriate prescribing of antimicrobials as part of the broader systems within a health service organisation to prevent and manage healthcare-associated infections, and improve patient safety and quality of care. This criterion also aligns closely with Standard 4: Medication Safety. Despite this recommendation, little is known about what AMS activities are undertaken in these facilities and what additional resources would be required in order to meet these national standards. WHAT DOES THE PAPER ADD?: This is the first survey that has been conducted of public hospital and health services in Queensland, a large decentralised state in Australia. This paper describes what AMS activities are currently being undertaken, identifies practice gaps, barriers to implementation and opportunities for improvement in Queensland hospitals. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS?: Several areas for improvement such as reviewing antimicrobial prescribing with feedback to the prescriber, auditing, and training and education in antimicrobial use have been identified. In addition, there appears to be a lack of resources to support AMS programs in some facilities.
-
To implement and evaluate strategies for improving access to emergency department (ED) care in a tertiary hospital. ⋯ Multiple reforms targeting processes both within the ED and its interface with inpatient units greatly improved access to ED care over 12 months and were associated with decreased in-hospital mortality. WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THIS TOPIC?: Prolonged stays in the ED result in overcrowding, delayed ambulance access to ED care and increased adverse outcomes for admitted patients. The introduction in Australia of National Emergency Access Targets (NEAT), which stipulate at least 70% of patients in the ED must exit the department within 4h, have spurred hospitals into implementing a wide range of reforms with varying levels of success in achieving such targets. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER ADD?: This study demonstrates how multiple reforms implemented in a poor performing tertiary hospital caused the proportion of patients exiting the ED within 4h to double within 9 months to reach levels comparable with best performing peer hospitals. This was associated with a 26% reduction in in-hospital mortality for admitted patients and no clinically significant adverse effects. It demonstrates the importance of robust governance structures, executive sponsorship, cross-disciplinary collaboration, regular feedback of NEAT performance data and major redesign of existing clinical processes, work practices and bed management operations. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICIANS AND MANAGERS?: Improving access to emergency care should be regarded as a problem located and resolved both within and without the ED. It requires a whole-of-hospital solution involving interdisciplinary collaboration and significant change in culture and practice relating to inpatient units and their interface with the ED.
-
Time spent in the emergency department (ED) before admission to hospital is often considered an important key performance indicator (KPI). Throughout Australia and New Zealand, there is no standard definition of 'time of admission' for patients admitted through the ED. By using data submitted to the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database, the aim was to determine the differing methods used to define hospital admission time and assess how these impact on the calculation of time spent in the ED before admission to an intensive care unit (ICU). ⋯ Different methods are used in Australia and New Zealand to define admission time to hospital. Professional bodies, hospitals and jurisdictions should ensure standardisation of definitions for appropriate interpretation of KPIs as well as for the interpretation of studies assessing the impact of admission time to ICU from the ED. WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THE TOPIC?: There are standards for the maximum time spent in the ED internationally, but these standards vary greatly across Australia. The definition of such a standard is critically important not only to patient care, but also in the assessment of hospital outcomes. Key performance indicators rely on quality data to improve decision-making. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER ADD?: This paper quantifies the variability of times measured and analyses why the variability exists. It also discusses the impact of this variability on assessment of outcomes and provides suggestions to improve standardisation. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS?: This paper provides a clearer view on standards regarding length of stay in the ICU, highlighting the importance of key performance indicators, as well as the quality of data that underlies them. This will lead to significant changes in the way we standardise and interpret data regarding length of stay.
-
Chronic conditions, financial burden and pharmaceutical pricing: insights from Australian consumers.
To explore the perceptions of Australian consumers and carers about the financial burden associated with medicines used for the treatment of chronic conditions. ⋯ The financial burden associated with medicines used for the management of chronic conditions by Australian consumers is substantial. It is compounded by the ongoing need for multiple medicines and indirect effects associated with chronic conditions, such as the impact on employment. WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THE TOPIC?: Medicines are a common form of treatment in chronic conditions. The financial burden related to medicines use, including co-payments, is associated with reduced adherence and other cost-coping strategies. Out of pocket costs for prescription medicines are relatively high in Australia compared with some other countries, including New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Australian consumers with chronic illness are likely to be at particular risk of financial burden associated with medicines use. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER ADD?: This paper explores the perceptions of consumers and carers around the financial burden associated with the use of medicines for the treatment of chronic conditions in Australia. It draws on the experiences and perceptions of a diverse group of consumers in Australia who identify as having, or caring for someone with, a chronic condition(s). WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS?: Health professionals who assist consumers to manage their medicines need to be aware of the potential for financial burden associated with medicines use and its potential impact on adherence. There is a need for health professionals to educate and assist consumers with chronic conditions to ensure they can navigate the health system to maximum benefit and receive financial entitlements for which they are eligible.