Use of measures of socioeconomic deprivation in planning primary health care workforce and defining health care need in Australia

Australia is in the midst of significant health reform, of which equity and access and the role of primary health care is of priority. Current measures to address workforce maldistribution are determined geographically. This fails to recognise the diversity of need and inequity within areas. Nationally and internationally there is growing expertise in and evidence of the power of geographical information systems (GIS) in primary health care policy development, service delivery and evaluation. This study sought to examine whether measures of remoteness areas adequately reveal high need populations, measured against socioeconomic disadvantage and physician to population ratios using GIS methodology. Australia is in the midst of significant health reform, of which equity and access and the role of primary health care is of priority. Current measures to address workforce maldistribution are determined geographically. This fails to recognise the diversity of need and inequity within areas. Nationally and internationally there is growing expertise in and evidence of the power of geographical information systems (GIS) in primary health care policy development, service delivery and evaluation. This study sought to examine whether measures of remoteness areas adequately reveal high need populations, measured against socioeconomic disadvantage and physician to population ratios using GIS methodology.The research reported in this paper is a project of the Australian Primary Health Care Research Institute which is supported by a grant from the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing under the Primary Health Care Research Evaluation and Development Strategy

The Impact of Insurance and a Usual Source of Care on Emergency Department Use in the United States

Background. Finding a usual source of care (USC) is difficult for certain populations. This analysis determines how insurance type and having a USC affect the settings in which patients seek care. Methods. In this cross-sectional study of the 2000–2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys, we assessed the percentage of low-income persons with half or more of their ambulatory visits to the emergency department (ED). Respondents were stratified based on insurance type and presence of a USC. Results. In 2011, among Medicaid enrollees without USCs, 21.6% had half or more of their ambulatory visits to EDs compared to 8.1% for those with USCs. Among the uninsured without USCs, 24.1% went to an ED for half or more of their ambulatory visits compared to 8.8% for those with USCs in 2011. Among the privately insured without USCs, 7.8% went to an ED for half or more of their ambulatory visits compared to 5.0% for those with USCs in 2011. These differences remained in multivariate analyses. Conclusions. Those who lack USCs, particularly the uninsured and Medicaid enrollees, are more likely to rely on EDs

Research-informed health care reform: turning data into information to guide policy and improve health outcomes

APHCRI Conversations was a regular program of presentations held at the Department of Health to facilitate exchange between APHCRI Network researchers and Department policymakers. Topics are developed jointly with the Department of Health and involve a range of speakers from APHCRI, including CRE invited experts, CRE Chief Investigators and stream project Chief Investigator

Core Principles to Improve Primary Care Quality Management

Quality management in American health care is in crisis. Performance measurement in its current form is costly, redundant, and labyrinthine. Increasingly, its contribution to achieving the Quadruple Aim is under close examination, especially in the domain of primary care services, where the burden of measurement is heaviest. This article assesses the state of quality management in primary care in the United States, particularly the 2015 Medicare Access and Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act, in comparative perspective, drawing lessons from the Quality and Outcomes Framework in the United Kingdom. The health care delivery function specific to primary care is pivotal to crossing the quality chasm, yet prior efforts to improve the quality of this function have failed more often than succeeded. These failures are the result of quality programs unguided by core principles of primary care. Quality management in primary care requires a more disciplined approach, adherent to 4 foundational principles: optimizing holistic patient and population health; harnessing the Quadruple Aim as a dynamic whole; applying measurements as tools for quality, not outcomes of quality; and prioritizing therapeutic relationships. These principles serve as the foundation for a bridge to high-functioning primary care that will lead American health care closer to the Quadruple Aim

Primary care research priorities in low- and middle-income countries

PURPOSE To identify and prioritize the needs for new research evidence for primary health care (PHC) in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) about organization, models of care, and financing of PHC. METHODS Three-round expert panel consultation of LMIC PHC practitioners and academics sampled from global networks, via web-based surveys. Iterative literature review conducted in parallel. Round 1 (pre–Delphi survey) elicited possible research questions to address knowledge gaps about organization and models of care and about financing. Round 2 invited panelists to rate the importance of each question, and in round 3 panelists provided priority ranking. RESULTS One hundred forty-one practitioners and academics from 50 LMICs from all global regions participated and identified 744 knowledge gaps critical to improving PHC organization and 479 for financing. Four priority areas emerged: effective transition of primary and secondary services, horizontal integration within a multidisciplinary team and intersectoral referral, integration of private and public sectors, and ways to support successfully functioning PHC professionals. Financial evidence priorities were mechanisms to drive investment into PHC, redress inequities, increase service quality, and determine the minimum necessary budget for good PHC. CONCLUSIONS This novel approach toward PHC needs in LMICs, informed by local academics and professionals, created an expansive and prioritized list of critical knowledge gaps in PHC organization and financing. It resulted in research questions, offering valuable guidance to global supporters of primary care evaluation and implementation. Its source and context specificity, informed by LMIC practitioners and academics, should increase the likelihood of local relevance and eventual success in implementing research findings

Primary care financing: a systematic assessment of research priorities in low- and middle-income countries

Introduction: Financing of primary healthcare (PHC) is the key to the provision of equitable universal care. We aimed to identify and prioritise the perceived needs of PHC practitioners and researchers for new research in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) about financing of PHC. Methods: Three-round expert panel consultation using web-based surveys of LMIC PHC practitioners, academics and policy-makers sampled from global networks. Iterative literature review conducted in parallel. First round (PreDelphi survey) elicited possible research questions to address knowledge gaps about financing. Responses were independently coded, collapsed and synthesised to two lists of questions. Round 2 (Delphi Round 1) invited panellists to rate importance of each question. In Round 3 (Delphi Round 2), panellists ranked questions in order of importance. Results: A diverse range of PHC practitioners, academics and policy-makers in LMIC representing all global regions identified 479 knowledge gaps as potentially critical to improving PHC financing. Round 2 provided 31 synthesised questions on financing for rating. The top 16 were ranked in Round 3e to produce four prioritised research questions. Conclusions: This novel exercise created an expansive and prioritised list of critical knowledge gaps in PHC financing research questions. This offers valuable guidance to global supporters of primary care evaluation and implementation, including research funders and academics seeking research priorities. The source and context specificity of this research, informed by LMIC practitioners and academics on a global and local basis, should increase the likelihood of local relevance and eventual success in implementing the findings

Research gaps in the organisation of primary healthcare in low-income and middle-income countries and ways to address them: a mixed-methods approach

Introduction Since the Alma-Ata Declaration 40 years ago, primary healthcare (PHC) has made great advances, but there is insufficient research on models of care and outcomes—particularly for low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Systematic efforts to identify these gaps and develop evidence-based strategies for improvement in LMICs has been lacking. We report on a global effort to identify and prioritise the knowledge needs of PHC practitioners and researchers in LMICs about PHC organisation. Methods Three-round modified Delphi using web-based surveys. PHC practitioners and academics and policy-makers from LMICs sampled from global networks. First round (pre-Delphi survey) collated possible research questions to address knowledge gaps about organisation. Responses were independently coded, collapsed and synthesised. Round 2 (Delphi round 1) invited panellists to rate importance of each question. In round 3 (Delphi round 2), panellists ranked questions into final order of importance. Literature review conducted on 36 questions and gap map generated. Results Diverse range of practitioners and academics in LMICs from all global regions generated 744 questions for PHC organisation. In round 2, 36 synthesised questions on organisation were rated. In round 3, the top 16 questions were ranked to yield four prioritised questions in each area. Literature reviews confirmed gap in evidence on prioritised questions in LMICs. Conclusion In line with the 2018 Astana Declaration, this mixed-methods study has produced a unique list of essential gaps in our knowledge of how best to organise PHC, priority-ordered by LMIC expert informants capable of shaping their mitigation. Research teams in LMIC have developed implementation plans to answer the top four ranked research questions

Clinical Registries Could Improve Influenza Like Illness and COVID-19 Surveillance

Capacity for tracking COVID-19 prevalence patterns is hampered by insufficient data, particularly from rural and small communities. The PRIME Registry holds data for 5.4 million patients in 47 states who made 638,983 Influenza-Like Illness (ILI) visits in 2019, mirroring CDC’s ILINet temporal patterns but with higher volume and greater rural penetration. Clinical data registries are viable partners that could fill gaps for epidemic sentinel functions and have rich patient data which may identify factors predictive of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality.https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154853/1/ILI-PRIME_AnnalsFamMed_FINAL.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154853/2/RehkopfILIFig1.docxhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154853/3/RehkopfILIFig2.docxDescription of ILI-PRIME_AnnalsFamMed_FINAL.pdf : Main ArticleDescription of RehkopfILIFig1.docx : Figure 1Description of RehkopfILIFig2.docx : Figure

Primary Care Research Priorities in Low-and Middle-Income Countries

PURPOSE To identify and prioritize the needs for new research evidence for primary health care (PHC) in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) about organization, models of care, and financing of PHC. METHODS Three-round expert panel consultation of LMIC PHC practitioners and academics sampled from global networks, via web-based surveys. Iterative literature review conducted in parallel. Round 1 (pre-Delphi survey) elicited possible research questions to address knowledge gaps about organization and models of care and about financing. Round 2 invited panelists to rate the importance of each question, and in round 3 panelists provided priority ranking. RESULTS One hundred forty-one practitioners and academics from 50 LMICs from all global regions participated and identified 744 knowledge gaps critical to improving PHC organization and 479 for financing. Four priority areas emerged: effective transition of primary and secondary services, horizontal integration within a multidisciplinary team and intersectoral referral, integration of private and public sectors, and ways to support successfully functioning PHC professionals. Financial evidence priorities were mechanisms to drive investment into PHC, redress inequities, increase service quality, and determine the minimum necessary budget for good PHC. CONCLUSIONS This novel approach toward PHC needs in LMICs, informed by local academics and professionals, created an expansive and prioritized list of critical knowledge gaps in PHC organization and financing. It resulted in research questions, offering valuable guidance to global supporters of primary care evaluation and implementation. Its source and context specificity, informed by LMIC practitioners and academics, should increase the likelihood of local relevance and eventual success in implementing research findings.The authors agreed to bid for funding through their shared professional network–the World Organization of Family Doctors (WONCA)–because the aim of the grant aligns with WONCA’s academic mission. Funding came from Ariadne Laboratories through Brigham and Women’s Hospital, which is the recipient of a Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation grant

Baseline LAW Glass Formulation Testing

The major objective of the baseline glass formulation work was to develop and select glass formulations that are compliant with contractual and processing requirements for each of the LAW waste streams. Other objectives of the work included preparation and characterization of glasses with respect to the properties of interest, optimization of sulfate loading in the glasses, evaluation of ability to achieve waste loading limits, testing to demonstrate compatibility of glass melts with melter materials of construction, development of glass formulations to support ILAW qualification activities, and identification of glass formulation issues with respect to contract specifications and processing requirements