Suchergebnisse

Abstract Background While there is a significant focus on the health and well-being of women during pregnancy, labour and birth, much less emphasis is placed on the care of postpartum women and their infants in primary care following the birth. Some studies have investigated the role of GPs in postpartum care, and others examined facilitators and barriers to mothers accessing care. However there is little information available to investigate the effect of practice related factors on access to care of mothers and infants at this time. Methods A 20-item questionnaire for completion by the practice managers was mailed to 497 general practices in Southern Queensland, Australia between February and July 2013. Questionnaire items included practice demographics, practice procedures and personnel including appointment scheduling, billing, practice nurse function and qualifications and a free-text option for comments. Descriptive statistics are presented as numbers and percentages. Chi Squared test compared practice location with methods of identification of postpartum women, practice size with other Queensland data and ANOVA compared practice size with the number of postpartum appointments. Logistic regression was used to predict variables that were related to booked appointment times. Free text responses were grouped in common themes. Results The response rate was 27.4 %. At 67.2 % of the practices, mothers had to self-identify as needing a postpartum consultation and most consultations were allocated 15 minutes or less. Only 20 % of practices accepted the government insurance payment (bulk-billing) for all maternal and infant services, with more practices bulk-billing children only. Out-of-pocket expenses ranged from $10-$60. Nearly 80 % of practice nurses saw postpartum mothers or infants 'nearly always' or 'sometimes'. Approximately 30 % had midwifery or child health training. There were higher odds of longer booked appointment times for solo practitioner practices (unadj OR 3.30 95%CI 1.03-10.57), but no other variables predicted booked appointment times Conclusions This study identified a number of practice related factors that, if addressed, could positively impact on postpartum care. These include ensuring ongoing practice relationships to assist with booking appropriate consultation times and guaranteeing that there are no financial impediments to women accessing care. Some factors can easily be adapted within practices. Others would require changes of policy at a local or national level.

BackgroundThe vast health inequities experienced by people with intellectual disability remain indisputable. Persistent and contemporary challenges exist for primary healthcare providers and researchers working to contribute to improvements to the health and well‐being of people with intellectual disability. Over two decades after the only review of supports for primary healthcare providers was published, this paper contributes to an evolving research agenda that aims to make meaningful gains in health‐related outcomes for this group.MethodsThe present authors updated the existing review by searching the international literature for developments and evaluations of multinational models of care.ResultsBased on our review, we present three strategies to support primary healthcare providers: (i) effectively using what we know, (ii) considering other strategies that offer support to primary healthcare professionals and (iii) researching primary health care at the system level.ConclusionsStrengthening primary care by supporting equitable provision of health‐related care for people with intellectual disability is a much needed step towards improving health outcomes among people with intellectual disability. More descriptive quantitative and qualitative research, as well as intervention‐based research underpinned by rigorous mixed‐methods evaluating these strategies at the primary care level, which is sensitive to the needs of people with intellectual disability will assist primary care providers to provide better care and achieve better health outcomes.Accessible AbstractMany people with intellectual disability have poor health. The authors reviewed what has been written by other researchers about how to improve the health of people with intellectual disability. In the future, people who support adults with intellectual disability should continue doing what they do well, think of other ways to improve health, and do more research about health. At all times, the needs of people with intellectual disability should be the greatest concern for those trying to support them.

BACKGROUND: Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) have transformed the treatment of numerous autoimmune and inflammatory diseases but their perceived risk of harm may be a barrier to use. METHODS: In a retrospective mixed-methods study, we analysed conventional (c) and biologic (b) DMARDs-related calls and compared them with rest of calls (ROC) from consumers to an Australian national medicine call center operated by clinical pharmacists from September 2002 to June 2010. This includes the period where bDMARDs became available on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, the government-subsidized prescription medicines formulary. We compared caller and patient demographics, enquiry types and motivation to information-seek for both cDMARDs and bDMARDs with ROC, using a t-test for continuous data and a chi-square test for categorical data. We explored call narratives to identify common themes. RESULTS: There were 1547 calls involving at least one DMARD. The top three cDMARD enquiry types were side effects (27.2%), interactions (21.9%), and risk versus benefit (11.7%). For bDMARDs, the most common queries involved availability and subsidized access (18%), mechanism and profile (15.8%), and side effects (15.1%). The main consumer motivations to information-seek were largely independent of medicines type and included: inadequate information (44%), wanting a second opinion (23.6%), concern about a worrying symptom (18.8%), conflicting information (6.9%), or information overload (2.3%). Question themes common to conventional and biological DMARDs were caller overemphasis on medication risk and the need for reassurance. Callers seeking information about bDMARDs generally overestimated effectiveness and focused their attention on availability, cost, storage, and medicine handling. CONCLUSION: Consumers have considerable uncertainty regarding DMARDs and may overemphasise risk. Patients cautiously assess the benefits and risks of their DMARDs but when new treatments emerge, they tend to overestimate their effectiveness.

BACKGROUND Financial incentives and audit plus feedback on performance are two strategies commonly used by governments to motivate general practitioners (GP) to undertake specific healthcare activities. However, in recent years, governments have reduced or removed incentive payments without evidence of the potential impact on GP behaviour and patient outcomes. This trial (known as ACCEPt-able) aims to determine whether preventive care activities in general practice are sustained when financial incentives and/or external audit plus feedback on preventive care activities are removed. The activity investigated is annual chlamydia testing for 16- to 29-year-old adults, a key preventive health strategy within this age group. METHODS/DESIGN ACCEPt-able builds on a large cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) that evaluated a 3-year chlamydia testing intervention in general practice. GPs were provided with a support package to facilitate annual chlamydia testing of all sexually active 16- to 29-year-old patients. This package included financial incentive payments to the GP for each chlamydia test conducted and external audit plus feedback on each GP's chlamydia testing rates. ACCEPt-able is a factorial cluster RCT in which general practices are randomised to one of four groups: (i) removal of audit plus feedback-continue to receive financial incentive payments for each chlamydia test; (ii) removal of financial incentive payments-continue to receive audit plus feedback; (iii) removal of financial incentive payments and audit plus feedback; and (iv) continue financial incentive payments and audit plus feedback. The primary outcome is chlamydia testing rate measured as the proportion of sexually active 16- to 29-year-olds who have a GP consultation within a 12-month period and at least one chlamydia test. DISCUSSION This will be the first RCT to examine the impact of removal of financial incentive payments and audit plus feedback on the chlamydia testing behaviour of GPs. This trial is particularly timely and will increase our understanding about the impact of financial incentives and audit plus feedback on GP behaviour when governments are looking for opportunities to control healthcare budgets and maximise clinical outcomes for money spent. The results of this trial will have implications for supporting preventive health measures beyond the content area of chlamydia. TRIAL REGISTRATION The trial has been registered on the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12614000595617 ).

Background: Financial incentives and audit plus feedback on performance are two strategies commonly used by governments to motivate general practitioners (GP) to undertake specific healthcare activities. However, in recent years, governments have reduced or removed incentive payments without evidence of the potential impact on GP behaviour and patient outcomes. This trial (known as ACCEPt-able) aims to determine whether preventive care activities in general practice are sustained when financial incentives and/or external audit plus feedback on preventive care activities are removed. The activity investigated is annual chlamydia testing for 16- to 29-year-old adults, a key preventive health strategy within this age group. Methods/design: ACCEPt-able builds on a large cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) that evaluated a 3-year chlamydia testing intervention in general practice. GPs were provided with a support package to facilitate annual chlamydia testing of all sexually active 16- to 29-year-old patients. This package included financial incentive payments to the GP for each chlamydia test conducted and external audit plus feedback on each GP's chlamydia testing rates. ACCEPt-able is a factorial cluster RCT in which general practices are randomised to one of four groups: (i) removal of audit plus feedback-continue to receive financial incentive payments for each chlamydia test; (ii) removal of financial incentive payments-continue to receive audit plus feedback; (iii) removal of financial incentive payments and audit plus feedback; and (iv) continue financial incentive payments and audit plus feedback. The primary outcome is chlamydia testing rate measured as the proportion of sexually active 16- to 29-year-olds who have a GP consultation within a 12-month period and at least one chlamydia test. Discussion: This will be the first RCT to examine the impact of removal of financial incentive payments and audit plus feedback on the chlamydia testing behaviour of GPs. This trial is particularly timely and will ...

Background: A strong and self confident primary care workforce can deliver the highest quality care and outcomes equitably and cost effectively. To meet the increasing demands being made of it, primary care needs its own thriving research culture and knowledge base. Methods: Review of recent developments supporting primary care clinical research. Results: Primary care research has benefited from a small group of passionate leaders and significant investment in recent decades in some countries. Emerging from this has been innovation in research design and focus, although less is known of the effect on research output. Conclusion: Primary care research is now well placed to lead a broad re-vitalisation of academic medicine, answering questions of relevance to practitioners, patients, communities and Government. Key areas for future primary care research leaders to focus on include exposing undergraduates early to primary care research, integrating this early exposure with doctoral and postdoctoral research career support, further expanding cross disciplinary approaches, and developing useful measures of output for future primary care research investment.