Search

OBJECTIVES: Demand for ED care is increasing at a rate higher than population growth. Strategies to attenuate ED demands include diverting low-acuity general practice-type ED attendees to alternate primary healthcare settings. The present study assessed the ED attendees' receptiveness to accept triage nurse's face-to-face advice to explore alternate options for medical care and what factors influence the level of acceptance.METHODS: The ED attendees of four major public hospital EDs in Brisbane were surveyed between August and October 2018, using a questionnaire informed by Health Belief Model's cues to action.RESULTS: Of the 514 valid responses, 81% of respondents were very likely/likely to accept the triage nurse's advice to see a general practitioner. Self-perceived urgency of presenting condition/s (odds ratio [OR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-0.97), not having confidence in general practitioner (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.21-0.66) and having a medical record at the hospital (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.36-0.99) were negatively associated with the likelihood of accepting the advice. For every point increase in perceived seriousness, the odds of accepting the advice decreased by 16% (95% CI 6-25%).CONCLUSION: Most of the participants believed that EDs were for emergent care and they attended the ED because they perceived their presenting condition/s to be serious and/or urgent. The acceptability of face-to-face advice by triage nurse to seek help in general practice was influenced by perceived threats of the illness, and the underlying beliefs about availability, accessibility, suitability and affordability of the service.

Objective: To estimate the proportion of ED patients in urban Queensland who are potentially suitable for general practitioner (GP) care. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted using ED Information System data from Metro North Hospital and Health Service in Brisbane, Australia for three consecutive financial years (2014–2015 to 2016–2017). The hospitals included two Principal Referral and two Public Acute hospitals. GP-type patients were calculated using the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), Australasian College for Emergency Medicine (ACEM) and the validated Sprivulis methods. Results: Of the 822 841 ED presentations, 219 567 (27%) were potentially GP-type patients by AIHW, 49 307 (6%) by ACEM and 61 836 (8%) by Sprivulis methods. The higher proportion of GP-type presentations were during 08.00 to 17.00 hours by AIHW and ACEM methods. Of the lower-acuity triage categories of 4 (286 154 presentations) and 5 (5658 presentations), AIHW estimated that 62% and 80% of the patients were GP-type patients, as compared to 9% and 22% by ACEM, and 9% and 0.3% by Sprivulis method. The mean costs of adult GP-type patients is $345 by the AIHW and $406 by the ACEM method, lower than non-GP type patients ($706 and $622, respectively). Conclusions: There is considerable variation in what is considered GP-type ED presentations based on the three methods employed and this variation may have fuelled the debate surrounding what is ‘avoidable’ ED utilisation. Regardless, the study findings provide an interesting addition to defining and addressing appropriate utilisation of ED services.

Background: Saudi Arabia has invested heavily in its health care system by establishing health care infrastructures to improve health of the nation. However, it remains to be seen whether it is efficient and effective in providing health care services needed. Primary health care, which is the basis of universal health coverage, needs to be assessed on its perfor-mance, challenges and future opportunities to serve the Saudi Arabian population. Aims: This review aimed to identify challenges within the Saudi Arabian health care system with a focus on primary health care services, and to analyse the interrelated factors in order to suggest remedial reforms to further strengthen and improve the health care system. Methods: A narrative review of previous studies and governmental reports was undertaken to extract, analyse, synthe-size and report the findings. Results: The review found a number of key areas for improvement in the primary health care system. These areas include: the scope, structure, infrastructure, financing, increased demand, increased costs and workforce capacity. Other critical challenges include inequitable access to health services, quality and safety of services, the growing burden of chronic dis-eases, lack of an effective information system, management and leadership issues, and gaps in the referral system. Conclusion: The Saudi Arabian health care system needs comprehensive reform with a focus on primary health care.

The COVID-19 pandemic may be a defining event of the 21st Century in much the same way as the influenza pandemic of 1918 changed a world already tortured by world conflict. Australia's experience may well shape our future and our position in the world.