Search

Introduction and Aims: The structures of health systems impact on patient outcomes. We present and analyse the first detailed mapping of who funds alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment and the channels and intermediaries through which funding flows from the funding sources to treatment providers.Design and Methods: The study involved a literature review of AOD treatment financing and existing diagrammatic representations of the structure of the Australian health system. We interviewed 190 key informants to particularise the AOD treatment sector, and undertook two case examples of government funded non-government organisations providing AOD treatment.Results: Funding sources include the Australian and state and territory governments, philanthropy, fund-raising and clients themselves. While funding sources align with the health sector generally and the broader social services sector, the complexity of flows from source to treatment service and the number of intermediaries are noteworthy. So too are the many sources of funding drawn on by some treatment providers. Diversification is both beneficial and disadvantageous for non-government treatment providers, adding to administrative workloads, but smoothing the risk of funding shortfalls. Government funders benefit from sharing risk.Discussion and Conclusions: Circuitous funding flows multiply the funding sources drawn on by services and put distance between the funding source and the service provider. This leads to concerns over lack of transparency about what is being purchased and challenges for the multiply funded service provider in maintaining programs and service models amid multiple and sometimes competing funding and accountability frameworks. [Chalmers J, Ritter A, Berends L, Lancaster K. Following the money: Mapping the sources and funding flows of alcohol and other drug treatment in Australia. Drug Alcohol Rev 2016;35:255-262]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study examined whether patients' perception of recovery differed for those receiving treatment under a compulsory treatment order (CTO) compared to those who were not.Method: A total of 86 participants with schizophrenia/schizo-affective disorder were interviewed about their views on recovery, and their clinical files were examined to ascertain if they were under a CTO at time of interview.Results: No association between being under a CTO and recovery beliefs was found. Irrespective of whether patients were under a CTO or not, the majority of participants (82%) reported that they thought recovery is possible and half of the participants (51%) reported that they were in recovery.Conclusion: The present study found no evidence that being under a CTO was related to additional pessimistic views about recovery or being recovered. Participants under a CTO were no more or less likely to report that recovery was possible, and that they were recovered, as participants who were not under a CTO. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author reflects on the important role played by health professionals on the recovery of people affected by natural disasters in Australia. The author cites issues that were considered important for health professionals, including the impact of the initial disaster exposure and losses, psychological distress and the characteristics of the post-disaster environment. The author further examines the impact of losing important people on children, who were affected by bushfires.