Helen Keleher

Why primary health care offers a more comprehensive approach to tackling health inequities than primary care.

As governments attempt to focus more intently on how to deal with alarming measures of health disadvantage and inequities, a reformist gaze seems to have settled on the primary care sector. Simultaneously, in literature about this area, whether intended or not, primary health care and primary care are terms that are increasingly interchanged. This article argues that the slippage in language is counter-productive, first because it disguises the transformative potential of strategies and approaches that can make the fundamental changes necessary to improve health status, and second because the structures and practices of the primary care sector are not necessarily compatible with notions of comprehensive primary health care. There is much to be lost if primary health care and health promotion are disguised as primary care, and not understood for their capacity to make a difference to health inequities although of course in some circumstances, comprehensive primary health care is interdependent with services provided by primary care. In this article, characteristics of primary care and primary health care are juxtaposed to show that if the strengths and limitations of each model are understood, they can be mobilised in collaborative partnerships to deal more effectively with health inequities, than our system has so far been able to do.

Practice nursing in Australia: A review of education and career pathways

BackgroundNurses in Australia are often not educated in their pre registration years to meet the needs of primary care. Careers in primary care may not be as attractive to nursing graduates as high-tech settings such as intensive or acute care. Yet, it is in primary care that increasingly complex health problems are managed. The Australian government has invested in incentives for general practices to employ practice nurses. However, no policy framework has been developed for practice nursing to support career development and post-registration education and training programs are developed in an ad hoc manner and are not underpinned by core professional competencies. This paper reports on a systematic review undertaken to establish the available evidence on education models and career pathways with a view to enhancing recruitment and retention of practice nurses in primary care in Australia.MethodsSearch terms describing education models, career pathways and policy associated with primary care (practice) nursing were established. These search terms were used to search electronic databases. The search strategy identified 1394 citations of which 408 addressed one or more of the key search terms on policy, education and career pathways. Grey literature from the UK and New Zealand internet sites were sourced and examined. The UK and New Zealand Internet sites were selected because they have well established and advanced developments in education and career pathways for practice nurses.Two reviewers examined titles, abstracts and studies, based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Disagreement between the reviewers was resolved by consensus or by a third reviewer.ResultsSignificant advances have been made in New Zealand and the UK towards strengthening frameworks for primary care nursing education and career pathways. However, in Australia there is no policy at national level prepare nurses to work in primary care sector and no framework for education or career pathways for nurses working in that sector.ConclusionThere is a need for national training standards and a process of accreditation for practice nursing in Australia to support the development of a responsive and sustainable nursing workforce in primary care and to provide quality education and career pathways.

Health Diaries in a Rural Australian Study

The authors designed a study around the use of health diaries comprising both open- and closed-ended questions and kept over a 16-week period by 118 rural and remote-dwelling families in Victoria, Australia. Participants documented their use of health services, episodes of illness, actions taken to keep healthy, and reflections on services and programs. In this article, the authors report on the health diary method. They discuss the qualitative ways in which the participants used their study involvement to enrich their lives: accessing health information and advice, furthering their concerns about rural health, and using the research process for social support. The authors discuss issues surrounding the rural and remote context of the study and the length of time over which the diaries were kept.

Changing gendered norms about women and girls at the level of household and community: a review of the evidence

Abstract Gendered norms are embedded in social structures, operating to restrict the rights, opportunities, and capabilities, of women and girls, causing significant burdens, discrimination, subordination, and exploitation. This review, developed for the Women and Gender Equity Knowledge Network of the WHO Commission on the Social Determinants of Health, sought to identify the best available research evidence about programmatic interventions, at the level of household and community, that have been effective for changing gender norms to increase the status of women. The focus was on developing countries. A wide range of single and multiple databases were searched, utilizing database specific keywords such as: women and girls; men and boys; household and community; intervention; and gender norms. Key themes were identified: education of women and girls; economic empowerment of women; violence against women, including female genital mutilation/cutting; and men and boys. Types of interventions, levels of action, populations of interest, and key outcomes from evaluations are identified. Evaluations are limited, with little evidence or measurement of changes in gender equity and womens empowerment. A key finding is, that targeting women and girls is a sound investment, but outcomes are dependent on integrated approaches and the protective umbrella of policy and legislative actions.

The effectiveness of health impact assessment in influencing decision-making in Australia and New Zealand 2005–2009

BackgroundHealth Impact Assessment (HIA) involves assessing how proposals may alter the determinants of health prior to implementation and recommends changes to enhance positive and mitigate negative impacts. HIAs growing use needs to be supported by a strong evidence base, both to validate the value of its application and to make its application more robust. We have carried out the first systematic empirical study of the influence of HIA on decision-making and implementation of proposals in Australia and New Zealand. This paper focuses on identifying whether and how HIAs changed decision-making and implementation and impacts that participants report following involvement in HIAs.MethodsWe used a two-step process first surveying 55 HIAs followed by 11 in-depth case studies. Data gathering methods included questionnaires with follow-up interview, semi-structured interviews and document collation. We carried out deductive and inductive qualitative content analyses of interview transcripts and documents as well as simple descriptive statistics.ResultsWe found that most HIAs are effective in some way. HIAs are often directly effective in changing, influencing, broadening areas considered and in some cases having immediate impact on decisions. Even when HIAs are reported to have no direct effect on a decision they are often still effective in influencing decision-making processes and the stakeholders involved in them. HIA participants identify changes in relationships, improved understanding of the determinants of health and positive working relationships as major and sustainable impacts of their involvement.ConclusionsThis study clearly demonstrates direct and indirect effectiveness of HIA influencing decision making in Australia and New Zealand. We recommend that public health leaders and policy makers should be confident in promoting the use of HIA and investing in building capacity to undertake high quality HIAs. New findings about the value HIA stakeholders put on indirect impacts such as learning and relationship building suggest HIA has a role both as a technical tool that makes predictions of potential impacts of a policy, program or project and as a mechanism for developing relationships with and influencing other sectors. Accordingly when evaluating the effectiveness of HIAs we need to look beyond the direct impacts on decisions.

Reorienting health services in the Northern Territory of Australia: a conceptual model for building health promotion capacity in the workforce

Introduction: Reorienting work practices to include health promotion and prevention is complex and requires specific strategies and interventions. This paper presents original research that used ‘real-world’ practice to demonstrate that knowledge gathered from practice is relevant for the development of practice-based evidence. The paper shows how practitioners can inform and influence improvements in health promotion practice. Practitioner-informed evidence necessarily incorporates qualitative research to capture the richness of their reflective experiences. Methods: Using a participatory action research (PAR) approach, the research question asked ‘what are the core dimensions of building health promotion capacity in a primary health care workforce in a real-world setting?’ PAR is a method in which the researcher operates in full collaboration with members of the organisation being studied for the purposes of achieving some kind of change, in this case to increase the amount of health promotion and prevention practice within this community health setting. The PAR process involved six reflection and action cycles over two years. Data collection processes included: survey; in-depth interviews; a training intervention; observations of practice; workplace diaries; and two nominal groups. The listen/reflect/act process enabled lessons from practice to inform future capacity-building processes. Results: This research strengthened and supported the development of health promotion to inform ‘better health’ practices through respectful change processes based on research, practitioner-informed evidence, and capacity-building strategies. A conceptual model for building health promotion capacity in the primary health care workforce was informed by the PAR processes and recognised the importance of the determinants approach. Conclusion: Practitioner-informed evidence is the missing link in the evidence debate and provides the links between evidence and its translation to practice. New models of health promotion service delivery can be developed in community settings recognising the importance of involving practitioners themselves in these processes. (Global Health Promotion, 2013; 20(2): 53–63)

The work, education and career pathways of nurses in Australian general practice.

There is little understanding about the educational levels and career pathways of the primary care nursing workforce in Australia. This article reports on survey research conducted to examine the qualifications and educational preparation of primary care nurses in general practice, their current enrolments in education programs, and their perspectives about post-registration education. Fifty-eight practice nurses from across Australia completed the survey. Over 94% reported that they had access to educational opportunities but identified a range of barriers to undertaking further education. Although 41% of nurses said they were practising at a specialty advanced level, this correlated with the number of years they had worked in general practice rather than to any other factor, including level of education. Respondents felt a strong sense of being regarded as less important than nurses working in the acute care sector. Almost 85% of respondents reported that they did not have a career pathway in their organisation. They also felt that while the public had confidence in them, there was some way to go regarding role recognition.

Characteristics of health impact assessments reported in Australia and New Zealand 2005-2009

Objective: To describe the use and reporting of Health Impact Assessment (HIA) in Australia and New Zealand between 2005 and 2009.

The impacts of injury at the individual, community and societal levels: a systematic meta-review

OBJECTIVES Injury is a major public health problem. While the impacts of injury on the injured person are well documented, there is relatively little knowledge about the impacts of injury on those individuals and groups in the community connected to the injured person. This study seeks to describe this breadth of research using a meta-review methodology. STUDY DESIGN Systematic meta-review. METHODS To gain a better understanding of the known impacts of injury on family, community and society, a systematic meta-review of injury outcomes research literature was conducted. Seventy-eight peer-reviewed published literature reviews were included in the meta-review. RESULTS Of these, 70 reported outcomes at the level of the injured person including mortality, body functions, activity and participation limitations. Nine reviews reported impacts at the level of the community including impacts on family members, work colleagues and carers. Six studies reported impacts at the societal level including economic, health system and injury compensation system impacts. CONCLUSIONS In summary, the meta-review identified a substantial body of knowledge at the individual level outcomes of injury, and a relative lack of information regarding the community and societal impacts of injury. An injury outcome framework is proposed on the basis of the findings of the meta-review to guide future research activity, particularly with regard to injury outcome domains where there is currently limited evidence. A comprehensive framework that takes account of all levels of impact is necessary for effective policies, systems and strategies to support recovery following injury.

Planning for population health in Australia's health reforms

4. Baranowski T, Cullen K, Micklas T, Thompson D, Baranowski J. Are Current Health Behavioral Change Models Helpful in Guiding Prevention of Weight Gain Efforts? Obes Res. 2003;11 Suppl:23-43. 5. Sharma M. School-based interventions for childhood and adolescent obesity. Obes Rev. 2006;7(3):261-9. 6. Green LW, Kreuter MW. Health Promotion Planning: An Educational and Ecological Approach. Montain View (CA): Mayfield; 1999. 7. McLeroy KR, Bibeau D, Steckler A, Glanz K. An ecological perspective on health promotion programs. Health Education Quarterly. 1988;15:351-77. 8. Kok G, Schaalma H, Ruiter RAC, Empelen PV, Brug J. Intervention Mapping: A Protocol for Applying Health Psychology Theory to Prevention Programmes. J Health Psychol. 2004;9(1):85-98. 9. Baranowski T, Cullen K, Nicklas T, Thompson D, Baranowski J. School-Based Obesity Prevention: A Blueprint for Taming the Epidemic. Am J Health Behav. 2002;26(6):486-93. 10. Swinburn B, Egger GJ, Raza F. Dissecting obesogenic environments: The development and application of a framework for identifying and prioritising environmental interventions for obesity. Prev Med. 1999;29:563-70. 11. Renzaho A. Fat, rich and beautiful: changing socio-cultural paradigms associated with obesity risk, nutritional status and refugee children from subSaharan Africa. Health Place. 2004;10(1):105-13. 12. Summerbell C, Waters E, Edmunds L, Kelly S, Brown T, Campbell K. Interventions for preventing obesity in children (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; 3, 2005. Oxford (UK): Update Software; 2005. 13. Swinburn B, Egger G. Preventive strategies against weight gain and obesity. Obes Rev. 2002;3:289-301. 14. Lynch J. Social epidemiology: some observations about the past, present and future. Australasian Epidemiologist. 2000;7(3):3. 15. World Health Organisation. Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion. Ottawa (CAN): Department of Health and Welfare, WHO; 1986. 16. Dooris M. Joining up settings for health: a valuable investment for strategic partnerships? Critical Public Health. 2004;14(1):49-61. 17. The International Union for Health Promotion and Education (IUHPE). Protocols and Guidelines for Health Promoting Schools. Promotion and Education. 2005;12(3-4):145-7. 18. Israel B, Schulz A, Parker E, Becker A. Review of Community-Based Research: Assessing Partnership Approaches to Improve Public Health. Annu Rev Public Health. 1998;19:173-202. 19. Gibbs L, Gold L, Kulkens M, Riggs E, Van Gemert C, Waters E. Are the benefits of a community-based participatory approach to public health research worth the costs? Just Policy. 2008;47:52-9. 20. Goodman RM, Yoo S, Jack LJ. Applying comprehensive community-based approaches in diabetes prevention in diabetes prevention: rationale. principles and models. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2006;12;545-54. 21. Cross T, Bazron B, Dennis K, Isaacs M. Towards a Culturally Competent System of Care. Vol I. Washington (DC): National Technical Assistance Centre for Children’s Mental Health, Georgetown University Child Development Centre;1989. 22. National Health and Medical Research Council. Cultural Competence in Health: A Guide for Policy, Partnerships and Participation. Canberra (AUST): Commonwealth of Australia; 2006. 23. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office of Minority Health. National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health Care. Washington (DC): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2001. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-6405.2010.00689.x