Search

Within the health services research community there is a growing strength of feeling that ongoing partnerships between researchers and decision-makers are critically important to effective transfer and exchange of knowledge generated from health services research. A body of literature is emerging around this idea that favours a particular model of partnership based on decision-maker involvement in research. This model is also gaining favour among health research funding bodies internationally. We argue that it is premature for the health services community to privilege any particular model of partnership between researchers and decision-makers. Rather a diversity of models should be conceptualized, explored in theory and practice, and evaluated. We identify seven dimensions that could be used to describe and differentiate models of partnerships for knowledge exchange and illustrate how these dimensions could be applied to analysing partnerships, using three case studies from recent and ongoing health services research partnerships in Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The objectives of this audit were to document the current status of health services research (HSR) in Australia in terms of inputs and outputs. Inputs were defined as the number of organised centres or groups undertaking HSR, the extent to which HSR was being developed and the funding available for HSR. Outputs were measured as the number of peer-reviewed papers. Methods: Centres or groups were identified via the membership of the HSRAANZ and a web-based search. Information from annual reports and/or other published sources was used to determine the extent of capacity building and available funding. The tables of contents of 21 journals published over a 10-year period were searched for articles reporting Australian HSR. Results: Eighteen groups were identified that undertook HSR as their predominant activity, while twelve were involved in HSR as a collaborative activity. No HSR-specific training (in terms of under- or postgraduate degrees) was identified, although more than 400 postgraduate students were being supervised in the university departments where HSR groups were situated. Between 1998 and 2001, more than AU$13 million was awarded for HSR, most of it by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC). Over the past 10 years, 482 articles about Australian health services have been published in the peer-reviewed journals audited. Conclusions: Although HSR is widespread in Australia, no specific training appears to be available to build capacity. Overall, HSR is not well-funded especially by organisations outside the NHMRC or Australian Research Council. Thus, it is not surprising that the output of Australian HSR, in terms of peer-reviewed articles, is slight. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To identify factors that influence the cost-effectiveness of hospital-in-the-home (HITH) and to discuss the impact of funding arrangements in creating incentives or disincentives for the establishment of HITH services. Methods: A review of HITH services in Australia was undertaken. Based on the review, factors affecting the relative costs of HITH and conventional care were identified, in particular, the effect of funding and organisational arrangements on the incentives for managers and providers to choose between HITH and conventional care. Results: The review of HITH services identified a wide range of models of HITH in Australia. Factors identified as important to the success of HITH included demographic and location issues, referral mechanisms, the choice of staffing and the management of the programme. However, it was clear that the structure of the programme often related to funding arrangements. Issues such as 'incentive funding', establishment costs and opportunity for costshifting were identified as being relevant to incentives for the efficient provision of HITH. Conclusions: Evaluations are essential to inform decisions about whether HITH is likely to be a viable and costeffective alternative to inpatient care. However, the relative costs of HITH and conventional care will depend on local factors. From the point of view of the decision-maker, these will be affected by funding and organisational arrangements. Funders must be aware that complex financial incentives may mask the true costs of HITH services relative to hospital services. They need to ensure that the incentives created by funding arrangements are transparent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To review the coverage of health care funding and resourcing issues in the quality printed media in Australia. Methods: Content analysis of all articles in six major print publications with detailed commentary on four major issues. Results: One thousand one hundred and fifty articles were published over 12 months, most in the front three pages. Coverage of many issues was prompted by an event, such as an election, government budget or policy announcement. Although issues were rarely personalised, the use of an individual authoritative spokesperson was, with some individuals becoming well recognised as experts. In general, these experts represented vested interest or lobby groups. The media discussion rarely dealt with the system as a whole, and generally approached a topic or issue in isolation from its inter-relationships with other issues. Conclusion: Health care funding stories are newsworthy but more for their political interest than as reflection of a social debate about values. Media reports rarely deal with the complexity of health policy issues, or challenge the assumptions and positions put forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]