Search

Objective Design Setting Participants Results Conclusion The objective of this study was to determine what professional factors impact the retention of pathology workers in regional, rural and remote Australia.A cross‐sectional survey was used to collect data regarding the professional factors that impact the retention of regional, rural and remote pathology workers in Australia (n = 95). The survey focused on pathology workers’ satisfaction with specific professional factors and how long they intended to stay in their current position.Regional, rural and remote (MM2‐7) pathology laboratories in Australia.There were a total of 95 participants, including 24 phlebotomists/laboratory assistants, 34 medical laboratory scientists and 29 supervisors/managers, with the majority of participants being from New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia.Significant positive associations were found between satisfaction with career advancement opportunities, workplace culture and maintaining professional skills with the retention of regional, rural and remote pathology workers. Open‐ended responses indicated that personal factors also played an important role in pathology worker retention in regional, rural and remote communities.This study provides important insights into the professional factors that impact the retention of pathology workers in regional, rural and remote Australia. Personal factors were also found to play an important role in retention. These findings have highlighted the need for further research to be conducted to explore the relationship between professional and personal factors and how this impacts the retention of pathology workers in regional, rural and remote Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To develop theory about how and why the supervision and support model used by the Remote Vocational Training Scheme (RVTS) addresses the professional and non‐professional needs of doctors (including many international medical graduates) who are training towards general practice or rural generalist fellowship while based in the same rural or remote practice. Design, setting, participants: We conducted a realist evaluation based on the RAMESES II protocol. The initial theory was based on situated learning theory, networked ecological systems theory, cultural theory and geographical narcissism theory. The theory was developed by collecting empirical data through interviews with 27 RVTS stakeholders, including supervisors, participants and RVTS staff. The theory was refined using a project reference and a stakeholder advisory group and confirmed using individual meetings with experts. Main outcomes measures: Theory about how the contexts of person, place and program interacted to address professional and non‐professional needs. Results: The RVTS program offers remote access to knowledgeable and caring supervisors, real‐time tailored advice, quality resources and regular professional networking opportunities, including breaks from the community. It worked well because it triggered five mechanisms: comfort, confidence, competence, belonging and bonding. These mechanisms collectively fostered resilience, skills, professional identity and improved status; they effectively counteracted the potential effects of complex and relatively isolated work settings. Conclusion: This theory depicts how a remotely delivered supervision and support model addresses the place and practice challenges faced by different doctors, meeting their professional and non‐professional needs. The participants felt valued as part of a special professional group delivering essential primary health care services in challenging locations. The theory could be adapted and applied to support other rural and remote doctors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aim of this study was to develop the Remote Health Value Framework to evaluate the models of healthcare provision for workers in the oil and gas sector, predominantly situated in rural and remote areas. Methods: The framework was co-designed with the leadership team in one global oil and gas company using a multi-criteria decision analysis approach with a conjoint analysis component. This was used to elicit and understand preferences and trade-offs among different value domains that were important to the stakeholders with respect to the provision of healthcare for its workers. Preference elicitation and interviews were conducted with a mix of health, safety, and environment (HSE) team and non-HSE managers and leaders. Results: Out of five presented value domains, participants considered the attribute 'Improving health outcomes of employees' the most important aspect for the model of healthcare which accounted for 37.3% of the total utility score. Alternatively, the 'Program cost' attribute was least important to the participants, accounting for only 11.0% of the total utility score. The marginal willingness-to-pay analysis found that participants would be willing to pay A$9090 per utile for an improvement in a particular value attribute. Conclusions: This is the first value framework for healthcare delivery in the oil and gas industry, contextualised by its delivery within rural and remote locations. It provides a systematic and transparent method for creating value-based healthcare models. This approach facilitates the evaluation of healthcare investments, ensuring they align with value domains prioritised by the HSE and leadership teams. What is known about the topic? It has been challenging for oil and gas companies to deliver and evaluate value-based healthcare services to improve workers' wellbeing, supplementing essential emergency services and occupational health. What does this paper add? The Remote Health Value Framework (RHVF), developed and tested in this work, offers a blueprint for designing and evaluating models of care considering the companies' and workers' priorities. What are the implications for practitioners? The RHVF's application has the potential to improve industry standards, enabling a data-driven approach to healthcare investments that closely align with both corporate objectives and employee wellbeing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Setting Participants Design Results Conclusions Globally, most doctors train and work in metropolitan areas but a key strategy for developing the rural health workforce is expanding rural training. The aim of this study was to describe the scope and quality of learning along with skill acquisition of GP trainees based in regional, rural, and remote settings.Regional, rural and remote settings in Queensland Australia excluding Brisbane.Thirty‐seven general practice trainees who had undertaken their first community placement were recruited from regional, rural and remote learning settings within Queensland.Qualitative descriptive methodology based on constructionist epistemology was employed which allowed for the exploration of current GP trainees' experiences. Trainees were interviewed and data were thematically analysed as to the scope and quality of learning by the setting of training. Learning experiences were then mapped against the Dreyfus and Dreyfus model to explore skill acquisition.In terms of the scope and quality of learning, rural and remote trainees mainly focused on the diverse and unique (sometimes challenging) experiences their setting offered compared with regionally based trainees. Mapping of the trainee comments to the Dreyfus model of skill acquisition demonstrated that regardless of setting, equivalent learning occurred by GP trainees.This exploratory study provides evidence that rural and remote learning may provide a more diverse and challenging experience. It suggests an equivalence of quality of education and skill acquisition across settings rural, regional and remote. This suggests that the training distribution policies may not disadvantage GP trainees and the scope and quality of more remote learning may increase uptake of remote placements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on clinical supervision practices of health care workers in health care settings in one Australian state. Method: A bespoke survey was developed and administered online using Qualtrics™. The survey consisted of Likert scale and closed questions, with options for free text comments. Numerical data were analysed descriptively and using Chi‐Square tests. Textual data were analysed through content analysis. Results: Of the 178 survey respondents, 42% were from allied health disciplines, 39% from nursing and midwifery, and 19% from medicine. The type and mode (i.e., face‐to‐face, telesupervision) of clinical supervision prior to the pandemic and at the time of survey completion (i.e., July–August 2021) were similar. Eighteen percent of respondents had a change in supervision arrangements but only 5% had a change in supervisor. For the 37% who changed roles due to COVID‐19, 81% felt their current supervisor was still able to support them, 69% were still having their supervisory needs met. Analyses of textual data resulted in the development of two categories: Supervision deteriorating, and some clinical supervision functions (i.e., formative and restorative) being more impacted than others (i.e., normative). Conclusion: There were substantial disruptions to several parameters of clinical supervision due to COVID‐19, that may pose a threat to high quality supervision. Health care workers reported pandemic‐induced stress and mental health challenges that were not always addressed by effective restorative supervision practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]