Consultancy to progress hospital in the home care provision: Final report, CHERE Project Report No 13

In July 1998, the Commonwealth Department of Health and Family Services commissioned the Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE) to identify and document Hospital in the Home (HITH) care models nationally and internationally. The purpose of this consultancy was to examine the appropriateness of this form of care for acutely ill patients and to make recommendations about how to increase the utilisation and cost effectiveness of services. Hospital in the Home is emerging internationally and within Australia as a viable alternative form of provision of acute care. The benefits of HITH have generally been seen in terms of its capacity to provide a cost-effective and acceptable alternative to hospital inpatient care, which reduces pressure on hospital beds. However, so far there has only been limited evaluation to lend support to these claims. Over the past decade a wide range of hospital in the home programs have been introduced across the Australian health care system. These programs have often emerged in response to local factors and have a range of different purposes, funding and organisational arrangements, and varying levels of success. In some states hospital in the home has been formalised into a program, whereas in other parts of Australia the introduction of HITH has been left to local decision makers. Thus, the experience of HITH has been extremely variable. It is appropriate at this stage to draw together information about what services are available, how acceptable these services are and what they have achieved. This information is important for determining the future directions of HITH in Australia, as well as providing a valuable resource for service providers and policy makers.Hospital in the home, Australia

New South Wales drug court evaluation: Cost-effectiveness, CHERE Project Report 17a

In this report we examine an issue central to the creation of the NSW Drug Court: namely its cost-effectiveness, compared with conventional sanctions, in reducing drug-related crime. We were particularly fortunate in undertaking this evaluation, to receive the support and cooperation of the Drug Court and the Attorney General in evaluating the Drug Court using a randomised controlled trial. Randomised controlled trials, in which individuals are randomly allocated to ?treatment? and ?control? groups are recognised as being the ?gold standard? when it comes to outcome evaluation. They provide more assurance of control over extraneous factors which might otherwise bias an evaluation than any other form of research design. To our knowledge, this is the first occasion on which a criminal justice program in Australia has been evaluated using a randomised control design. The evaluation is a first in one other way as well. Very few evaluations of criminal justice or crime prevention programs (either in Australia or overseas) pay much heed to the cost of the program. This greatly hampers the capacity of Government to make rational decisions about the allocation of scarce resources across competing programs. Of course, decisions on programs which affect the liberty of citizens cannot, and should not, be made on the grounds of cost-effectiveness alone. Nevertheless it is to be hoped that our efforts will convince others of the feasibility and value of introducing cost-effectiveness analyses into criminal justice evaluation.Economic evaluation, treatment programs

Assessing the economic consequences of two cannabis policy options

The research in this dissertation addresses the question of costs and benefits of two policy options for cannabis in the context of New South Wales, Australia. The first policy is the current one, where cannabis is illegal, although a cannabis cautioning program is available for the use or possession of a small amount of cannabis. In the second policy option, cannabis is a legal but a highly regulated good. As no legalised-regulated policy currently exists, as part of this research the policy framework was developed with the objective of minimising the harms associated with the use of cannabis and with the policy itself. The societal value and preferences for the policies were evaluated in two ways. First, through the use of a traditional cost benefit analysis (CBA) and secondly, with a discrete choice experiment (DCE). The CBA estimated important costs and benefits in monetary terms for each policy with the results presented as a net social benefit. The DCE assessed the preferences for different policies for cannabis among a representative sample of the population. Potential trade-offs between key outcomes including the prevalence of consumption, expenditures by the criminal justice system and health care systems related to cannabis were explored. The results from the CBA indicate there is no clear difference in the net social benefit between the two policy options, although there is a potential revenue gain for government in the legalised-regulated option. The results from the DCE reveal that compared to the current policy there is a moderate preference for legalisation of cannabis among a community sample and strong preference against the complete criminalisation of cannabis. The results also demonstrate the trade-offs between different harms and benefits as well as the interactions between personal characteristics and the policy preferences. The findings from this analysis of the costs and benefits of two cannabis policy options will start to redress some of the evidence gaps that arise when making public policy in this area

Service impact analysis of telehealth in NSW, CHERE Project Report No 12

telehealth

Perceptions of extended-release buprenorphine injections for opioid use disorder among people who regularly use opioids in Australia

2019 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction Aims: To examine perceptions of extended-release (XR) buprenorphine injections among people who regularly use opioids in Australia. Design: Cross-sectional survey prior to implementation. XR-buprenorphine was registered in Australia in November 2018. Setting: Sydney, Melbourne and Hobart. Participants. A total of 402 people who regularly use opioids interviewed December 2017 to March 2018. Measurements: Primary outcome concerned the proportion of participants who believed XR-buprenorphine would be a good treatment option for them, preferred weekly versus monthly injections and perceived advantages/disadvantages of XR-buprenorphine. Independent variables concerned the demographic characteristics and features of current opioid agonist treatment (OAT; medication-type, dose, prescriber/dosing setting, unsupervised doses, out-of-pocket expenses and travel distance). Findings: Sixty-eight per cent [95% confidence interval (CI) = 63-73%] believed XR-buprenorphine was a good treatment option for them. They were more likely to report being younger [26-35 versus \u3e 55 years; odds ratio (OR) = 3.16, 95% CI = 1.12-8.89; P = 0.029], being female (OR = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.04-2.69; P = 0.034), \u3c 10 years school education (OR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.12-3.12; P = 0.016) and past-month heroin (OR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.15-2.85; P = 0.006) and methamphetamine use (OR = 1.90, 95% CI = 1.20-3.01; P = 0.006). Fifty-four per cent reported no preference for weekly versus monthly injections, 7% preferred weekly and 39% preferred monthly. Among OAT recipients (n = 255), believing XR-buprenorphine was a good treatment option was associated with shorter treatment episodes (1-2 versus ≥ 2 years; OR = 3.93, 95% CI = 1.26-12.22; P = 0.018), fewer unsupervised doses (≤ 8 doses past-month versus no take-aways; OR = 0.50; 95% CI = 0.27-0.93; P = 0.028) and longer travel distance (≥ 5 versus \u3c 5 km; OR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.20-3.65; P = 0.009). Sixty-nine per cent reported \u27no problems or concerns\u27 with potential differences in availability, flexibility and location of XR-buprenorphine. Conclusions: Among regular opioid users in Australia, perceptions of extended-release buprenorphine as a good treatment option are associated with being female, recent illicit drug use and factors relating to the (in)convenience of current opioid agonist treatment

Effect of cannabis use in people with chronic non-cancer pain prescribed opioids: findings from a 4-year prospective cohort study

Background Interest in the use of cannabis and cannabinoids to treat chronic non-cancer pain is increasing, because of their potential to reduce opioid dose requirements. We aimed to investigate cannabis use in people living with chronic non-cancer pain who had been prescribed opioids, including their reasons for use and perceived effectiveness of cannabis; associations between amount of cannabis use and pain, mental health, and opioid use; the effect of cannabis use on pain severity and interference over time; and potential opioid-sparing effects of cannabis. Methods The Pain and Opioids IN Treatment study is a prospective, national, observational cohort of people with chronic non-cancer pain prescribed opioids. Participants were recruited through community pharmacies across Australia, completed baseline interviews, and were followed up with phone interviews or self-complete questionnaires yearly for 4 years. Recruitment took place from August 13, 2012, to April 8, 2014. Participants were asked about lifetime and past year chronic pain conditions, duration of chronic non-cancer pain, pain self-efficacy, whether pain was neuropathic, lifetime and past 12-month cannabis use, number of days cannabis was used in the past month, and current depression and generalised anxiety disorder. We also estimated daily oral morphine equivalent doses of opioids. We used logistic regression to investigate cross-sectional associations with frequency of cannabis use, and lagged mixed-effects models to examine temporal associations between cannabis use and outcomes. Findings 1514 participants completed the baseline interview and were included in the study from Aug 20, 2012, to April 14, 2014. Cannabis use was common, and by 4-year follow-up, 295 (24%) participants had used cannabis for pain. Interest in using cannabis for pain increased from 364 (33%) participants (at baseline) to 723 (60%) participants (at 4 years). At 4-year follow-up, compared with people with no cannabis use, we found that participants who used cannabis had a greater pain severity score (risk ratio 1·14, 95% CI 1·01-1·29, for less frequent cannabis use; and 1·17, 1·03-1·32, for daily or near-daily cannabis use), greater pain interference score (1·21, 1·09-1·35; and 1·14, 1·03-1·26), lower pain self-efficacy scores (0·97, 0·96-1·00; and 0·98, 0·96-1·00), and greater generalised anxiety disorder severity scores (1·07, 1·03-1·12; and 1·10, 1·06-1·15). We found no evidence of a temporal relationship between cannabis use and pain severity or pain interference, and no evidence that cannabis use reduced prescribed opioid use or increased rates of opioid discontinuation. Interpretation Cannabis use was common in people with chronic non-cancer pain who had been prescribed opioids, but we found no evidence that cannabis use improved patient outcomes. People who used cannabis had greater pain and lower self-efficacy in managing pain, and there was no evidence that cannabis use reduced pain severity or interference or exerted an opioid-sparing effect. As cannabis use for medicinal purposes increases globally, it is important that large well designed clinical trials, which include people with complex comorbidities, are conducted to determine the efficacy of cannabis for chronic non-cancer pain

The present and future of QCD

This White Paper presents an overview of the current status and future perspective of QCD research, based on the community inputs and scientific conclusions from the 2022 Hot and Cold QCD Town Meeting. We present the progress made in the last decade toward a deep understanding of both the fundamental structure of the sub-atomic matter of nucleon and nucleus in cold QCD, and the hot QCD matter in heavy ion collisions. We identify key questions of QCD research and plausible paths to obtaining answers to those questions in the near future, hence defining priorities of our research over the coming decades

QCD and strongly coupled gauge theories : challenges and perspectives

We highlight the progress, current status, and open challenges of QCD-driven physics, in theory and in experiment. We discuss how the strong interaction is intimately connected to a broad sweep of physical problems, in settings ranging from astrophysics and cosmology to strongly coupled, complex systems in particle and condensed-matter physics, as well as to searches for physics beyond the Standard Model. We also discuss how success in describing the strong interaction impacts other fields, and, in turn, how such subjects can impact studies of the strong interaction. In the course of the work we offer a perspective on the many research streams which flow into and out of QCD, as well as a vision for future developments.Peer reviewe

The present and future of QCD

This White Paper presents an overview of the current status and future perspective of QCD research, based on the community inputs and scientific conclusions from the 2022 Hot and Cold QCD Town Meeting. We present the progress made in the last decade toward a deep understanding of both the fundamental structure of the sub-atomic matter of nucleon and nucleus in cold QCD, and the hot QCD matter in heavy ion collisions. We identify key questions of QCD research and plausible paths to obtaining answers to those questions in the near future, hence defining priorities of our research over the coming decades