scholarly journals Accessibility of Primary, Specialist, and Allied Health Services for Aboriginal People Living in Rural and Remote Communities: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study

10.2196/11471 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e11471 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rona Macniven ◽  
Kate Hunter ◽  
Michelle Lincoln ◽  
Ciaran O’Brien ◽  
Thomas Lee Jeffries Jr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Allied Health ◽  
Aboriginal People ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Rural And Remote ◽  
Remote Communities

scholarly journals Accessibility of Primary, Specialist, and Allied Health Services for Aboriginal People Living in Rural and Remote Communities: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rona Macniven ◽  
Kate Hunter ◽  
Michelle Lincoln ◽  
Ciaran O’Brien ◽  
Thomas Lee Jeffries Jr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Health Care Services ◽  
Allied Health ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Aboriginal People ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Snowball Sampling ◽  
Rural And Remote ◽  
Care Services

BACKGROUND Primary, specialist, and allied health services can assist in providing equitable access in rural and remote areas, where higher proportions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (Aboriginal Australians) reside, to overcome the high rates of chronic diseases experienced by this population group. Little is currently known about the location and frequency of services and the extent to which providers believe delivery is occurring in a sustained and coordinated manner. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study will be to determine the availability, accessibility, and level of coordination of a range of community-based health care services to Aboriginal people and identify potential barriers in accessing health care services from the perspectives of the health service providers. METHODS This mixed-methods study will take place in 3 deidentified communities in New South Wales selected for their high population of Aboriginal people and geographical representation of location type (coastal, rural, and border). The study is designed and will be conducted in collaboration with the communities, Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services (ACCHSs), and other local health services. Data collection will involve face-to-face and telephone interviews with participants who are health and community professionals and stakeholders. Participants will be recruited through snowball sampling and will answer structured, quantitative questions about the availability and accessibility of primary health care, specialist medical and allied health services and qualitative questions about accessing services. Quantitative data analysis will determine the frequency and accessibility of specific services across each community. Thematic and content analysis will identify issues relating to availability, accessibility, and coordination arising from the qualitative data. We will then combine the quantitative and qualitative data using a health ecosystems approach. RESULTS We identified 28 stakeholder participants across the ACCHSs for recruitment through snowball sampling (coastal, n=4; rural, n=12; and border, n=12) for data collection. The project was funded in 2017, and enrolment was completed in 2017. Data analysis is currently under way, and the first results are expected to be submitted for publication in 2019. CONCLUSIONS The study will give an indication of the scope and level of coordination of primary, specialist, and allied health services in rural communities with high Aboriginal populations from the perspectives of service providers from those communities. Identification of factors affecting the availability, accessibility, and coordination of services can assist ways of developing and implementing culturally sensitive service delivery. These findings could inform recommendations for the provision of health services for Aboriginal people in rural and remote settings. The study will also contribute to the broader literature of rural and remote health service provision. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPOR DERR1-10.2196/11471

scholarly journals Drivers of ‘clinically unnecessary’ use of emergency and urgent care: the DEUCE mixed-methods study

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (15) ◽  
pp. 1-256
Author(s):  
Alicia O’Cathain ◽  
Emma Knowles ◽  
Jaqui Long ◽  
Janice Connell ◽  
Lindsey Bishop-Edwards ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
General Practitioner ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Emergency Departments ◽  
Help Seeking ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Coping Capacity

Background There is widespread concern about the pressure on emergency and urgent services in the UK, particularly emergency ambulances, emergency departments and same-day general practitioner appointments. A mismatch between supply and demand has led to interest in what can be termed ‘clinically unnecessary’ use of services. This is defined by the research team in this study as ‘patients attending services with problems that are classified as suitable for treatment by a lower urgency service or self-care’. This is a challenging issue to consider because patients may face difficulties when deciding the best action to take, and different staff may make different judgements about what constitutes a legitimate reason for service use. Objectives To identify the drivers of ‘clinically unnecessary’ use of emergency ambulances, emergency departments and same-day general practitioner appointments from patient and population perspectives. Design This was a sequential mixed-methods study with three components: a realist review; qualitative interviews (n = 48) and focus groups (n = 3) with patients considered ‘clinically unnecessary’ users of these services, focusing on parents of young children, young adults and people in areas of social deprivation; and a population survey (n = 2906) to explore attitudes towards seeking care for unexpected, non-life-threatening health problems and to identify the characteristics of someone with a tendency for ‘clinically unnecessary’ help-seeking. Results From the results of the three study components, we found that multiple, interacting drivers influenced individuals’ decision-making. Drivers could be grouped into symptom related, patient related and health service related. Symptom-related drivers were anxiety or need for reassurance, which were caused by uncertainty about the meaning or seriousness of symptoms; concern about the impact of symptoms on daily activities/functioning; and a need for immediate relief of intolerable symptoms, particularly pain. Patient-related drivers were reduced coping capacity as a result of illness, stress or limited resources; fear of consequences when responsible for another person’s health, particularly a child; and the influence of social networks. Health service-related drivers were perceptions or previous experiences of services, particularly the attractions of emergency departments; a lack of timely access to an appropriate general practitioner appointment; and compliance with health service staff’s advice. Limitations Difficulty recruiting patients who had used the ambulance service to the interviews and focus groups meant that we were not able to add as much as we had anticipated to the limited evidence base regarding this service. Conclusions Patients use emergency ambulances, emergency departments and same-day general practitioner appointments when they may not need the level of clinical care provided by these services for a multitude of inter-related reasons that sometimes differ by population subgroup. Some of these reasons relate to health services, in terms of difficulty accessing general practice leading to use of emergency departments, and to population-learnt behaviour concerning the positive attributes of emergency departments, rather than to patient characteristics. Social circumstances, such as complex and stressful lives, influence help-seeking for all three services. Demand may be ‘clinically unnecessary’ but completely understandable when service accessibility and patients’ social circumstances are considered. Future work There is a need to evaluate interventions, including changing service configuration, strengthening general practice and addressing the stressors that have an impact on people’s coping capacity. Different subgroups may require different interventions. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017056273. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 15. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

P4-276: Health services development research with people with dementia: Key features, factors, and learning from a multi-site, mixed methods study

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (7S_Part_19) ◽  
pp. P891-P891
Author(s):  
Michael Bowen ◽  
Rosa Pepe ◽  
Sarah Buchanan ◽  
David Edgar ◽  
Lesley Hall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Development Research ◽  
People With Dementia ◽  
Key Features
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document