Suchergebnisse

Planning for capital development of public hospitals in Victoria is guided by a multi-stage process with comprehensive data analysis and thorough approval processes at each of the stages. The long development timeframes and the limitations in the data available to project service utilisation may negatively impact upon the service planning processes, and in some cases newly developed hospitals have not been sufficiently planned to meet community needs. This paper suggests that service utilisation forecasts derived from administrative databases require a more detailed verification process than currently exists. The process requires consideration of the drivers of demand to document the core assumptions about the future drivers, benchmarks with other jurisdictions, epidemiological, comparative and corporate needs assessment to explain the differences in utilisation rates, and sensitivity analysis. Given the cost of hospital construction and the rate of change in the healthcare sector, it is important that future hospital planning processes do not accept current utilisation trends as valid for future planning without this level of verification.

Leading and Managing Health Services: An Australasian Perspective provides a comprehensive overview of leadership and management in health services with a particular focus on the Australasian context. This text aims to help students develop leadership and management skills, and to critically analyse the issues they will face in practical health service settings. The book features a contemporary approach to learning, in line with the Health LEADS Australia framework which focuses on five key leadership attributes: Leads self, Engages systems, Achieves outcomes, Drives innovations and Shapes systems. Further, it offers a rich pedagogy both in the text and companion website. Chapters include case studies to provide examples of management and leadership issues in healthcare settings, and a wealth of reflective, short answer and multiple-choice questions to extend student learning. Written by respected Australian academics and industry experts, this text will equip health professional students with practical skills to successfully manage change and innovation.

(1) Background: A patient safety incident reporting system was introduced in Indonesian hospitals in 2006; however, under-reporting of patient safety incidents is evident. The government plays a vital role in the implementation of a national system. Therefore, this study focuses on how the Indonesian government has been undertaking its role in patient safety at provincial and city/district levels, including incident reporting according to the National Guideline for Hospital Patient Safety. (2) Methods: This study employed a qualitative approach with interviews of 16 participants from seven organizations. The data were managed using NVivo and thematically analyzed. (3) Results: The findings revealed several problems at the macro-, meso-, and micro-level as the government was weak in monitoring and evaluation. The District Health Office (DHO) and Provincial Health Office (PHO) were not involved in incident reporting, and there was a lack of government support for the hospitals. (4) Conclusions: The DHO and PHO have not carried out their roles related to patient safety as mentioned in the national guidelines. Lack of commitment to and priority of patient safety, the complexity of the bureaucratic structure, and a lack of systematic partnership and collaboration are problems that need to be addressed by systematic improvement. To ensure effective and efficient national outcomes, the three levels of government need to work more closely.

(1) Background: A patient safety incident reporting system was introduced in Indonesian hospitals in 2006; however, under-reporting of patient safety incidents is evident. The government plays a vital role in the implementation of a national system. Therefore, this study focuses on how the Indonesian government has been undertaking its role in patient safety at provincial and city/district levels, including incident reporting according to the National Guideline for Hospital Patient Safety. (2) Methods: This study employed a qualitative approach with interviews of 16 participants from seven organizations. The data were managed using NVivo and thematically analyzed. (3) Results:The findings revealed several problems at the macro-, meso-, and micro-level as the government was weak in monitoring and evaluation. The District Health O�ce (DHO) and Provincial Health O�ce (PHO) were not involved in incident reporting, and there was a lack of government support for the hospitals. (4) Conclusions: The DHO and PHO have not carried out their roles related to patient safety as mentioned in the national guidelines. Lack of commitment to and priority of patient safety, the complexity of the bureaucratic structure, and a lack of systematic partnership and collaboration are problems that need to be addressed by systematic improvement. To ensure e�ective and e�cient national outcomes, the three levels of government need to work more closely

In 2022 the Australian Data Availability and Transparency Act (DATA) commenced, enabling accredited "data users" to access data from "accredited data service providers." However, the DATA Scheme lacks guidance on "trustworthiness" of the data to be utilised for reuse purposes. Objectives: To determine: (i) Do researchers using government health datasets trust the data? (ii) What factors influence their perceptions of data trustworthiness? and (iii) What are the implications for government and data custodians? Method: Authors of published studies (2008–2020) that utilised Victorian government health datasets were surveyed via a case study approach. Twenty-eight trust constructs (identified via literature review) were grouped into data factors, management properties and provider factors. Results: Fifty experienced health researchers responded. Most (88%) believed that Victorian government health data were trustworthy. When grouped, data factors and management properties were more important than data provider factors in building trust. The most important individual trust constructs were: "compliant with ethical regulation" (100%) and "monitoring privacy and confidentiality" (98%). Constructs of least importance were knowledge of "participant consent" (56%) and "major focus of the data provider was research" (50%). Conclusion: Overall, the researchers trusted government health data, but data factors and data management properties were more important than data provider factors in building trust. Implications: Government should ensure the DATA Scheme incorporates mechanisms to validate those data utilised by accredited data users and data providers have sufficient quality (intrinsic and extrinsic) to meet the requirements of "trustworthiness," and that evidentiary documentation is provided to support these "accredited data."

Background: Health data sharing is important for monitoring diseases, policy and practice, and planning health services. If health data are used for secondary purposes, information needs to be provided to assist in reuse. Objectives: To review government health information asset websites to ascertain the extent of readily available, explanatory documentation for researcher sharing and reuse of these data. Method: Documentary analysis was undertaken on selected Victorian Government health information assets' websites in Australia. Data were obtained on nine information-categories: data custodian; data context; data dictionary; quality controls; data quality; limitations; access process; privacy/confidentiality/security and research requests/outputs. Information-categories were compared by dataset type (administrative or population-health) and by curating organisation (government or other agency). Descriptive statistics were used. Results: The majority of the 25 websites examined provided information on data custodian (96%) and data context (92%). Two-thirds reported access process (68%) and privacy/confidentiality/security information (64%). Compared with population-health websites, administrative dataset websites were more likely to provide access to a data dictionary (67% vs 50%) and information on quality controls (56% vs 44%), but less likely to provide information on the access process (56% vs 75%) and on research requests/outputs (0% vs 56%, p = 0.024). Compared with government-curated websites, other agency websites were more likely to provide information on research requests/outputs (80% vs 7%, p < 0.001). Conclusion: There is inconsistent explanatory documentation available for researchers for reuse of Victorian Government health datasets. Importantly, there is insufficient information on data quality or dataset limitations. Research-curated dataset websites are significantly more transparent in displaying research requests or outputs.

Background Governments have responsibility for ensuring the quality and fitness-for-purpose of personal health data provided to them. While these health information assets are used widely for research, this secondary usage has received minimal research attention. Objective This study aimed to investigate the secondary uses, in research, of population health and administrative datasets (information assets) of the Department of Health (DoH), Victoria, Australia. The objectives were to (i) identify research based on these datasets published between 2008 and 2020; (ii) describe the data quality studies published between 2008 and 2020 for each dataset and (iii) evaluate "fitness-for-purpose" of the published research. Method Using a modified scoping review, research publications from 2008 to 2020 based on information assets related to health service provision and containing person-level data were reviewed. Publications were summarised by data quality and purpose-categories based on a taxonomy of data use. Fitness-for-purpose was evaluated by comparing the publicly stated purpose(s) for which each information asset was collected, with the purpose(s) assigned to the published research. Results Of the >1000 information assets, 28 were utilised in 756 publications: 54% were utilised for general research purposes, 14% for patient safety, 10% for quality of care and 39% included data quality-related publications. Almost 85% of publications used information assets that were fit-for-purpose. Conclusion The DoH information assets were used widely for secondary purposes, with the majority identified as fit-for-purpose. We recommend that data custodians, including governments, provide information on data quality and transparency on data use of their health information assets.