Search

This paper is a position paper, which argues the position that critical thinking is a crucial skill, which needs to be developed in the school curriculum and that the creative arts can do this. The paper explores the states of the Arts in the present curriculum and goes on to argue that knowing how to develop critical thinking is an important pedagogical skill that needs to be developed in our pre-service teachers. This position is supported through data gathered from an innovative project that explored teachers' and mothers' perceptions of children's critical thinking.

We report on a succession planning pilot project in an Australian university health faculty. The programme aimed to enhance organisational stability and develop leadership capacity in middle level academics. Six monthly sessions addressed university and general leadership topics, communication, decision-making, working with change, self-management and career development. Participants were assisted by mentors and sponsors and completed a project for the faculty. Kirkpatrick's model was used to evaluate participants' reactions, knowledge, behaviour change and plans for the future using an open-ended questionnaire. Four men and four women completed the programme, rating it satisfactory. Participants' responses revealed acquisition of leadership capacity, changes in perceptions of leadership, and motivation to undertake leadership roles. Mentors were invaluable to leadership development and reported high satisfaction with the role. The model has potential as a guide for succession planning. (Contains 2 figures.)

Analysis of the quality of health services for families in Belmont, Western Australia, showed varied response levels. Younger persons gave public health services the highest ratings, and larger families felt these services improved health. Families with children and older people had more health concerns. Most respondents were satisfied with the services provided, but requested to have medical staff avoid patronizing attitudes while communicating information simply and honestly.

Introduction: The Australian Gold Coast Integrated Care programme trialled a model of care targeting those with chronic and complex conditions at highest risk of hospitalisation with the goal of producing the best patient outcomes at no additional cost to the healthcare system. This paper reports the economic findings of the trial. Methods: A pragmatic non-randomised controlled study assessed differences between patients enrolled in the programme (intervention group) and patients who received usual care (control group), in health service utilisation, including Medicare Benefits Schedule and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme claims, patient-reported outcome measures, including health-related quality of life, mortality risk, and cost. Results: A total of 1,549 intervention participants were enrolled and matched on the basis of patient level data to 3,042 controls. We found no difference in quality of life between groups, but a greater decrease in capability, social support and satisfaction with care scores and higher hospital service use for the intervention group, leading to a greater cost to the healthcare system of AUD$6,400 per person per year. In addition, the per person per year cost of being in the GCIC programme was AUD$8,700 equating to total healthcare expenditures of AUD$15,100 more for the intervention group than the control group. Conclusion: The GCIC programme did not show value for money, incurring additional costs to the health system and demonstrating no significant improvements in healthrelated quality of life. Because patient recruitment was gradual throughout the trial, we had only one year of complete data for analysis which may be too short a period to determine the true cost-consequences of the program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The Australian Gold Coast Integrated Care programme trialled an innovative model of care to proactively manage high risk patients with complex and chronic conditions in collaboration with general practitioners. The objective was to enhance coordination and continuity of care across primary and secondary health services from a single point-of-entry multidisciplinary coordination centre. This case study, embedded in the broader trial, analysed the perceptions of patients, healthcare staff and general practitioners on the adequacy, comprehensiveness, timeliness and acceptability of the new model of care to help inform the decision by the health service whether to adopt it beyond the trial. Methods: This mixed method embedded, explanatory case study design included surveys of general practice staff and focus groups with patients, carers and coordination centre staff. Qualitative data were thematically analysed and findings merged with survey data in a narrative explanatory case report. Discussion: Staff, patients, general practitioners and practice nurses were generally satisfied with services, coordination of care and information sharing but general practice staff satisfaction ratings declined over time. Conclusion: The programme enhanced care and coordination of services and was valued by patients and healthcare providers. Study results provide a rationale for adopting the model for those with chronic and complex conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Chronic diseases are the leading cause of illness, disability and death in Australia. The prevalence and associated health expenditure are projected to soar. There is no ‘whole system’ approach to healthcare in Australia. To overcome this fragmentation, the Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service (GCHHS) is developing a new model known as Gold Coast Integrated Care (GCIC). To evaluate GCIC a 4-year pilot trial commenced in March 2015. This protocol paper describes the evaluation of GCIC. Methods and analysis A pragmatic non-randomised controlled clinical trial is conducted to test the hypothesis that GCIC will result in improved health and well-being at no additional cost to the healthcare system. Using a mixed methods approach, impact, outcome and process evaluations will be undertaken to assess the effectiveness and acceptability, including the balance of costs between primary and public secondary care sectors, staff and training requirements, clinical service delivery, and trial implementation. Fifteen general practices have agreed to deliver GCIC. One thousand five hundred of their adult patients with treated chronic diseases, high risk of hospitalisation or healthcare utilisation were recruited to the intervention arm. Approximately 3000 patients not associated with the participating general practices were identified as controls using propensity matching which will provide service utilisation and disease data for usual care. Baseline data and follow-up observations are collected annually until the end of 2018. Quantitative analyses will measure patient healthcare costs, utilisation of health services, and health outcomes, and general practice clinical service delivery according to clinical guidelines (number of foot exams, HbA1c tests). Qualitative analyses will focus on patient and staff experiences, satisfaction, engagement and implementation of the programme as planned. Ethics and dissemination Approval was received from the GCHHS and Griffith University. The study is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12616000821493). Findings will be communicated via yearly reports to funding bodies and scientific publications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim Existing practice strategies for actively involving patients in care during hospitalisation are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to explore how healthcare professionals engaged patients in communication associated with care transitions. Method An instrumental, collective case study approach was used to generate empirical data about patient transitions in care. A purposive sample of key stakeholders representing (i) patients and their families; (ii) hospital discharge planning team members; and (iii) healthcare professionals was recruited in five Australian health services. Individual and group semi-structured interviews were conducted to elicit detailed explanations of patient engagement in transition planning. Interviews lasted between 30 and 60 minutes and were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data collection and analysis were conducted simultaneously and continued until saturation was achieved. Thematic analysis was undertaken. Results Five themes emerged as follows: (i) organisational commitment to patient engagement; (ii) the influence of hierarchical culture and professional norms on patient engagement; (iii) condoning individual healthcare professionals' orientations and actions; (iv) understanding and negotiating patient preferences; and (v) enacting information sharing and communication strategies. Most themes illustrated how patient engagement was enabled; however, barriers also existed. Conclusion Our findings show that strong organisational and professional commitment to patient-centred care throughout the organisation was a consistent feature of health services that actively engaged patients in clinical communication. Understanding patients' needs and preferences and having both formal and informal strategies to engage patients in clinical communication were important in how this involvement occurred. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article outlines the development of the Australian Gold Coast Integrated Care Model based on the elements identified in contemporary research literature as essential for successful integration of care between primary care, and acute hospital services. The objectives of the model are to proactively manage high risk patients with complex and chronic conditions in collaboration with General Practitioners to ultimately reduce presentations to the health service emergency department, improve the capacity of specialist outpatients, and decrease planned and unplanned admission rates. Central to the model is a shared care record which is maintained and accessed by staff in the Coordination Centre. We provide a process map outlining the care protocols from initial assessment to care of the patient presenting for emergency care. The model is being evaluated over a pilot three year proof of concept phase to determine economic and process perspectives. If found to be cost-effective, acceptable to patients and professionals and as good as or better than usual care in terms of outcomes, the strategic intent is to scale the programme beyond the local health service. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]