Search

The complex learning and socio-emotional profiles of students who are twice exceptional are often accompanied by challenges to their identification and support in the primary school. This exploratory research project, conducted in a primary school in New South Wales, Australia, focused on developing and trialling a comprehensive and useful assessment tool for teachers to use in the preliminary stage of investigating whether students might be twice-exceptional. Using mixed methods research methodology and a Participatory Action Research design, three primary-school teachers (including the first author) developed the Teacher Checklist Questionnaire (TCQ) based mainly on published research and anecdotal findings. All teachers at the school site from Years 2 to 6 (N = 10) participated in the first trial of the TCQ and the results from the analyses were positive in terms of validity, reliability, and usefulness. The main conclusion is that the tool shows promise as an early investigative tool to assess twice-exceptional students.

Rapid reviews of research are a key way in which policy makers use research. This paper examines 74 rapid reviews commissioned by health policy agencies through the Sax Institute's Evidence Check programme. We examine what prompted policy makers to commission rapid reviews, their purpose, how and when they intended to use them, and how this varied by agency. Policy makers commissioned rapid reviews primarily as part of planned policy processes and to identify alternative solutions to problems. Government departments responsible for multiple policy domains were more likely to commission rapid reviews for agenda setting and to test new ideas.

Introduction: Previous studies have observed low rates of adjuvant radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy (RP) for high-risk prostate cancer patients. However, it is not clear the extent to which these low rates are driven by urologists' referral and radiation oncologists' treatment patterns.Method: The Clinician-Led Improvement in Cancer Care (CLICC) implementation trial was conducted in nine public hospitals in New South Wales, Australia. Men who underwent RP for prostate cancer during 2013-2015 and had at least one high-risk pathological feature of extracapsular extension, seminal vesicle invasion and/or positive surgical margins were included in these analyses. Outcomes were as follows: (i) referral to a radiation oncologist within 4 months after RP ('referred'); (ii) commencement of radiotherapy within 6 months after RP among those who consulted a radiation oncologist ('radiotherapy after consultation').Results: Three hundred and twenty-five (30%) of 1071 patients were 'referred', and 74 (61%) of 121 patients received 'radiotherapy after consultation'. Overall, the probability of receiving radiotherapy within 6 months after RP was 15%. The probability of being 'referred' increased according to higher 5-year risk of cancer-recurrence (P < 0.001).Conclusion: Only 30% of patients with high-risk features are referred to a radiation oncologist with the likelihood of referral being influenced by the perceived risk of cancer-recurrence as well as the urologist's institutional/personal preference. When patients are seen by a radiation oncologist, 61% receive radiotherapy within 6 months after RP with the likelihood of receiving radiotherapy not being heavily influenced by increasing risk of recurrence. This suggests many suitable patients would receive radiotherapy if referred and seen by a radiation oncologist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study examined whether there has been change among Australia-based urologists' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs relating to guideline-recommended adjuvant radiotherapy for men with adverse pathologic features following radical prostatectomy since a prior survey in 2012 and investigated associations between attitudes and treatment preferences.Methods: A nationwide survey of Australia-based urologist members of the Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand.Results: Ninety-six respondents completed the 2015 survey (30% response rate) compared with 157 (45% response rate) in 2012. There was no significant change in awareness of national clinical practice guidelines for the management of prostate cancer. When considering adjuvant against salvage radiotherapy, urologists were significantly less favourable towards adjuvant radiotherapy in 2015 than in 2012 for two of three hypothetical clinical case scenarios with a high 10-year risk of biochemical relapse according to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomograms (P < 0.001 for both cases). In 2015, urologists were less positive overall towards the recommendation for post-operative adjuvant radiotherapy for men with locally advanced prostate cancer than in 2012 (P < 0.001), reflecting a significant change across a number of attitudes and beliefs. Of note, urologists felt other urologists would more likely be critical if they routinely referred the target patient group for radiotherapy in 2015 compared with 2012 (P = 0.007).Conclusion: In 2015 Australia-based urologists were less favourable towards adjuvant radiotherapy over watchful waiting for men with high-risk pathologic features post-prostatectomy than in 2012. We could find no new published research that precipitated this change in attitude. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a study which examined the availability of Australian research that provide information of hospital services reform. A bibliographic analysis of research that focused on the organization and delivery of Australian hospital services was conducted between 1996 and 2007. Study authors concluded that there is little but growing number of research that support reform of Australian hospital services. They added that collaborative work is needed to improve relevant research evidence.

Abstract: In 2008 the Australian government decided to remove white blood cells from all blood products. This policy of universal leucodepletion was a change to the existing policy of supplying leucodepleted products to high risk patients only. The decision was made without strong information about the cost-effectiveness of universal leucodepletion. The aims for this policy analysis are to generate cost-effectiveness data about universal leucodepletion, and to add to our understanding of the role of evidence and the political reality of healthcare decision-making in Australia. The cost-effectiveness analysis revealed universal leucodepletion costs $398,943 to save one year of life. This exceeds the normal maximum threshold for Australia. We discuss this result within the context of how policy decisions are made about blood, and how it relates to the theory and process of policy making. We conclude that the absence of a strong voice for cost-effectiveness was an important omission in this decision. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: This study assessed whether a theoretically conceptualised tailored intervention centred on multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) increased clinician referral behaviours in line with clinical practice guideline recommendations., Methods: Nine hospital Sites in New South Wales (NSW), Australia with a urological MDT and involvement in a state-wide urological clinical network participated in this pragmatic stepped wedge, cluster randomised implementation trial. Intervention strategies included flagging of high-risk patients by pathologists, clinical leadership, education, and audit and feedback of individuals' and study Sites' practices. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients referred to radiation oncology within 4 months after prostatectomy. Secondary outcomes were proportion of patients discussed at a MDT meeting within 4 months after surgery; proportion of patients who consulted a radiation oncologist within 6 months; and the proportion who commenced radiotherapy within 6 months. Urologists' attitudes towards adjuvant radiotherapy were surveyed pre- and post-intervention. A process evaluation measured intervention fidelity, response to intervention components and contextual factors that impacted on implementation and sustainability., Results: Records for 1071 high-risk post-RP patients operated on by 37 urologists were reviewed: 505 control-phase; and 407 intervention-phase. The proportion of patients discussed at a MDT meeting increased from 17% in the control-phase to 59% in the intervention-phase (adjusted RR = 4.32; 95% CI [2.40 to 7.75]; p < 0·001). After adjustment, there was no significant difference in referral to radiation oncology (intervention 32% vs control 30%; adjusted RR = 1.06; 95% CI [0.74 to 1.51]; p = 0.879). Sites with the largest relative increases in the percentage of patients discussed also tended to have greater increases in referral (p = 0·001). In the intervention phase, urologists failed to provide referrals to more than half of patients whom the MDT had recommended for referral (78 of 140; 56%)., Conclusions: The intervention resulted in significantly more patients being discussed by a MDT. However, the recommendations from MDTs were not uniformly recorded or followed. Although practice varied markedly between MDTs, the intervention did not result in a significant overall change in referral rates, probably reflecting a lack of change in urologists' attitudes. Our results suggest that interventions focused on structures and processes that enable health system-level change, rather than those focused on individual-level change, are likely to have the greatest effect., Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12611001251910 ). Registered 6 December 2011.

Objective: To investigate Australian urologists' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs, and the association of these with treatment preferences relating to guideline-recommended adjuvant radiotherapy for men with adverse pathologic features following radical prostatectomy., Subjects and Methods: A nationwide mailed and web-based survey of Australian urologist members of the Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand (USANZ)., Results: 157 surveys were included in the analysis (45% response rate). Just over half of respondents (54%) were aware of national clinical practice guidelines for the management of prostate cancer. Urologists' attitudes and beliefs towards the specific recommendation for post-operative adjuvant radiotherapy for men with locally advanced prostate cancer were mixed. Just over half agreed the recommendation is based on a valid interpretation of the underpinning evidence (54.1%, 95% CI [46%, 62.2%]) but less than one third agreed adjuvant radiotherapy will lead to improved patient outcomes (30.2%, 95% CI [22.8%, 37.6%]). Treatment preferences were varied, demonstrating clinical equipoise. A positive attitude towards the clinical practice recommendation was significantly associated with treatment preference for adjuvant radiotherapy (rho = 0.520, P < 0.0001). There was stronger preference for adjuvant radiotherapy in more recently trained urologists (registrars) while preference for watchful waiting was greater in more experienced urologists (consultants) (b = 0.156, P = 0.034; 95% CI [0.048, 1.24]). Urologists' attitudes towards clinical practice guidelines in general were positive., Conclusion: There remains clinical equipoise among Australian urologists in relation to adjuvant radiotherapy for men with adverse pathologic features following radical prostatectomy., (© 2016 The Authors BJU International © 2016 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Clinical networks are increasingly being viewed as an important strategy for increasing evidence-based practice and improving models of care, but success is variable and characteristics of networks with high impact are uncertain. This study takes advantage of the variability in the functioning and outcomes of networks supported by the Australian New South Wales (NSW) Agency for Clinical Innovation's non-mandatory model of clinical networks to investigate the factors that contribute to the success of clinical networks., Methods/design: The objective of this retrospective study is to examine the association between external support, organisational and program factors, and indicators of success among 19 clinical networks over a three-year period (2006-2008). The outcomes (health impact, system impact, programs implemented, engagement, user perception, and financial leverage) and explanatory factors will be collected using a web-based survey, interviews, and record review. An independent expert panel will provide judgements about the impact or extent of each network's initiatives on health and system impacts. The ratings of the expert panel will be the outcome used in multivariable analyses. Following the rating of network success, a qualitative study will be conducted to provide a more in-depth examination of the most successful networks., Discussion: This is the first study to combine quantitative and qualitative methods to examine the factors that contribute to the success of clinical networks and, more generally, is the largest study of clinical networks undertaken. The adaptation of expert panel methods to rate the impacts of networks is the methodological innovation of this study. The proposed project will identify the conditions that should be established or encouraged by agencies developing clinical networks and will be of immediate use in forming strategies and programs to maximise the effectiveness of such networks.