Article

A Systematic Review of Primary Health Care Delivery Models in Rural ad Remote Australia 1993–2006

Centre for Remote Health, Joint Centre of Flinders University & Charles Darwin University, Alice Springs, Northern Territory, Australia.
BMC Health Services Research (Impact Factor: 1.66). 01/2009; 8(1):276. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-8-276
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT One third of all Australians live outside of its major cities. Access to health services and health outcomes are generally poorer in rural and remote areas relative to metropolitan areas. In order to improve access to services, many new programs and models of service delivery have been trialled since the first National Rural Health Strategy in 1994. Inadequate evaluation of these initiatives has resulted in failure to garner knowledge, which would facilitate the establishment of evidence-based service models, sustain and systematise them over time and facilitate transfer of successful programs. This is the first study to systematically review the available published literature describing innovative models of comprehensive primary health care (PHC) in rural and remote Australia since the development of the first National Rural Health Strategy (1993-2006). The study aimed to describe what health service models were reported to work, where they worked and why.
A reference group of experts in rural health assisted in the development and implementation of the study. Peer-reviewed publications were identified from the relevant electronic databases. 'Grey' literature was identified pragmatically from works known to the researchers, reference lists and from relevant websites. Data were extracted and synthesised from papers meeting inclusion criteria.
A total of 5391 abstracts were reviewed. Data were extracted finally from 76 'rural' and 17 'remote' papers. Synthesis of extracted data resulted in a typology of models with five broad groupings: discrete services, integrated services, comprehensive PHC, outreach models and virtual outreach models. Different model types assume prominence with increasing remoteness and decreasing population density. Whilst different models suit different locations, a number of 'environmental enablers' and 'essential service requirements' are common across all model types.
Synthesised data suggest that, moving away from Australian coastal population centres, sustainable models are able to address diseconomies of scale which result from large distances and small dispersed populations. Based on the service requirements and enablers derived from analysis of reported successful PHC service models, we have developed a conceptual framework that is particularly useful in underpinning the development of sustainable PHC models in rural and remote communities.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Pim Kuipers, Aug 24, 2015
1 Follower
 · 
432 Views
    • "). Furthermore , some areas of Australia experience significant primary health care workforce shortages due to difficulties in attracting health professionals to rural and remote areas (Wakerman et al., 2006). There has also been an increasing trend towards the reduction of hours worked by general practitioners (GPs) and a feminisation of the general practice workforce has contributed to the trend of part-time work (Britt et al., 2009). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: International evidence indicates that nurses working in primary care can provide effective care and achieve positive health outcomes for patients similar to that provided by doctors. Nurse practitioners employed in primary health care perform some tasks previously exclusive to the GP role due to their advanced skills, knowledge and training. In November 2010 Medicare provider rights and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme rights were provided for nurse practitioners working in private practice, and in collaboration with a medical practitioner. However, there is limited evidence about how acceptable nurse practitioners are to Australian consumers and what knowledge consumers have of the nurse practitioner role in the delivery of primary health care. The aim of this study was to examine Australian health care consumers' perceptions of nurse practitioners working in primary health care. This paper reports on the results of seven focus groups (n = 77 participants) conducted around Australia. Focus groups participants were asked how acceptable nurse practitioners are as provides of primary health care. Although there was some confusion about the role of nurse practitioners and how this role differed from other primary health care nurses, participants in the focus groups were very positive about nurse practitioners and would find them acceptable in providing primary health care.
    Collegian Journal of the Royal College of Nursing Australia 03/2013; 20(1):35-41. DOI:10.1016/j.colegn.2012.03.001 · 0.84 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "However, some evidence indicates that innovative and successful service delivery models are possible in rural communities. As population size/density decreases and remoteness increases, integration across disciplines and between providers, and comprehensive (instead of specialised) services, become more necessary (Wakerman et al., 2008). Canadian research focusing on early learning and care hubs in two different areas of British Columbia (Ball, 2005; Rutherford et al., 2007) revealed themes of positive outcomes for parents, children, and communities associated with integrated early learning and care hubs. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study examined the experiences of rural parents accessing early years support services through a specific service delivery strategy in Ontario, Canada. Nine focus groups and five interviews were conducted in two rural communities as part of a larger research project exploring parent experiences in both urban and rural communities. Thematic analysis, informed by a critical ecological systems perspective, revealed that certain factors related to rural life and location affected parents' experiences. Services must be accessible in terms of location and social and psychological dimensions for parents to attend and make use of supports. These supports, in turn, foster healthy child development and healthy communities.
    Health & Place 09/2012; 18(6):1231-1239. DOI:10.1016/j.healthplace.2012.09.006 · 2.44 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The importance of telehealth strategies in addressing the health needs of rural residents has been well documented. A core problem in enacting telehealth strategies for patient education in rural settings, however, is a lasting perception that rural residents do not have access to, comfort with, or willingness to use varying emerging technologies. The current study was undertaken to simultaneously investigate access to technologies, comfort with technologies, and willingness to participate in technology-based interventions among high-need rural clinical populations. A sample of 199 patients was recruited at a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) in the rural South using convenience sampling. Participants completed a battery of assessments addressing technology access, use, and comfort as well as likelihood of participating in intervention modalities. Access to technologies among this underserved group was remarkably high; rural patients reported having high levels of access (near or above 50%) for all technologies assessed except for mp3 players. Comfort with using technologies was even higher, and participants reported being most likely to participate in programs taking place at a doctor’s office or in a church. The most likely technology to be embraced for interventions was interactive DVDs. The current study indicates that access to and comfort with emerging technologies is strong among highly underserved patients. Because of their ability to address transportation, access, and privacy concerns in rural settings, technology-based interventions (particularly those using DVDs or texting or delivered at a doctor’s office or church) should be developed and tested specifically for rural populations.
    12/2011; 1(2-4). DOI:10.1007/s12553-011-0009-9
Show more